they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
I was more hyped for Deus Ex HR than any game not named Mass Effect last gen. Then it came out and I played maybe 2 hours of it on 360 and put it down. A year later I bought it on PC, played it for like 30 minutes and then put it down. I really need to give this game another shot. It looked sooo cool.
definitely Deus Ex for me. Just more atmospheric and immersive, plus by the time Infinite released, we already had a couple Bioshocks (we had previous games in the Deus Ex series before as well, but they were nowhere near as recent). So we've been to Rapture a couple times already and the floating city of Colombia, while picturesque and pretty, wasn't terribly original. Human Revolution on the other hand, showed this interesting, darker side of a future, where cybernetics meets humanity, and it pulls you in, almost from the get go, with its story and protagonist, who you want to see on his journey. It's just a lot more interesting, as a narrative, and gameplay wise as well.
Deus Ex was the far better game for me. I was sophisticated stealhtgame with great level design and huge variability in gameplay. The only low were the boss fights. But whole Bioshock Infinite was just as bad as Deus Ex bossfights, or worse.
I found Bioshock Infinite to be incredibly mediocre. It felt like an FPS game and a story were just slapped together no matter how much they didn't fit. The gameplay really wasn't very engaging or entertaining either.
I've never played the new Deus Ex, but I'm very interested in it. I've come very close to buying it on several occasions.
I truly enjoyed both... while the story on human revolution felt more satisfying.. the character development or lack of was a bit saddening. The story on human ex and the gameplay that allowed multiple ways to get things done was something i didn't know i wanted to experience. It was great! and i really enjoyed the story, on the other hand Bioshock's story felt a bit lacking, the premise and environment held unused potential. On that note Bioshock infinite was tons of fun to play while Deus ex was more of a serious play style? it became annoying at times, and some bosses were truly a downer ( i was specializing in being a hacker ) and when you went full rambo it felt nothing more than a genetic FPS with stealth elements, while Bioshock infinite gave you fun and interesting abilities and combinations to mess around with + that hook was fun too all mixed in on constant gameplay.
TL;DR I would get into Deus Ex story but wouldn't replay it, however i would replay Bioshock infinite but skip all cut-scenes.
Bioshock Infinite by default, I didn't much care for Deus Ex HR, it wasn't bad but it wasn't anything like the hype suggested it should be. It was a very underwhelming game. At times, I could appreciate its William Gibson'esque cyberpunk influences but that's all it really had going for it. I found Bioshock Infinite to be good fun but nowhere near as appealing as the first Bioshock game was for its time. The first Bioshock totally took me by surprise when it released. Whereas Infinite was a game I waited too long for to care that much when I did actually play it.
I found Bioshock Infinite to be incredibly mediocre. It felt like an FPS game and a story were just slapped together no matter how much they didn't fit. The gameplay really wasn't very engaging or entertaining either.
I've never played the new Deus Ex, but I'm very interested in it. I've come very close to buying it on several occasions.
Don't get director's cut edition. Slightly improved boss battles aren't worth it IMO. You are forced to play boring DLC mission. Ruins the entire game.
I honestly don't like either one. I guess I like Bioshock Infinite a bit more b/c the animations in DE were just awful.
I swear the first time I saw someone talk in that game it's like the animations for lips and talking were from 2000.....just jaws moving up and down. And theres too many keys to configure. I have 18 buttons or keys at my immediate disposal...whether on my mouse or keyboard.
Games shouldn't require every single thought of the character to be keybound.
I like games that have keys doing multiple functions when different scenarios occur.
The whole thing just felt cheap or something.
On the other hand....BI was just easy and therefore boring. I played it on the hardest difficulty the first time through and about half way I forgot and went to up it....lol.
Human Revolution. The music, art style, gameplay, length - the game was freaking amazing overall.
Bioshock Infinite was personally, not very fun to play. The game just dragged, and dragged on forever. And the story wasn't all that great. I kind of predicted the ending myself so there was no "OH SHIT" kind of twist to shock me.
Couldn't really get into Deus Ex so Bioshock Infinite for me. I only gave DE a few hours though so probably need to go back to it at some point and play it properly.
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
However, that's not character establishment, that's not fleshing out characters. Never in the story is Comstock's beliefs flashed out or Booker's backstory other than Wounded Knee. In fact the fact that Booker's quest is "forced" by the Luteces instead of his own will makes his characterization even worse. Elizabeth got most of the focus when the game should have been about Booker.
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
However, that's not character establishment, that's not fleshing out characters. Never in the story is Comstock's beliefs flashed out or Booker's backstory other than Wounded Knee. In fact the fact that Booker's quest is "forced" by the Luteces instead of his own will makes his characterization even worse. Elizabeth got most of the focus when the game should have been about Booker.
there’s nothing wrong with character establishment maybe you found it bad because in bioshock the appearance versus reality and consider this that Booker’s the hero of story is not the star of story besides he’s tragic hero and as a tragic hero he has many flaws so you don’t have to like him. The beauty of bioshock doesn’t revolve around characters but the themes and the mystery. This game is a mockery of utopianism and people like Zachary Comstock who are trying to change the existing conditions by making a Utopia
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
However, that's not character establishment, that's not fleshing out characters. Never in the story is Comstock's beliefs flashed out or Booker's backstory other than Wounded Knee. In fact the fact that Booker's quest is "forced" by the Luteces instead of his own will makes his characterization even worse. Elizabeth got most of the focus when the game should have been about Booker.
there’s nothing wrong with character establishment maybe you found it bad because in bioshock the appearance versus reality and consider this that Booker’s the hero of story is not the star of story besides he’s tragic hero and as a tragic hero he has many flaws so you don’t have to like him. The beauty of bioshock doesn’t revolve around characters but the themes and the mystery. This game is a mockery of utopianism and people like Zachary Comstock who are trying to change the existing conditions by making a Utopia
You are missing the point. The point is that the characters were not well established. They are never explored. There just "are". And I am talking about just Infinite because Ryan and Lamb in the first two games, are well established. In fact, learning that Sophia Lamb's views were influenced by her father fits so well with Bioshock 2's themes.
Comstock is a very underdeveloped and poorly established villain. There is no place anywhere to even explain why he is evil and why he has the religion he does. In fact, there are clues that during development, Comstock was supposed to be full on Christian far right, which was basically completely changed in the final version to start his own religion so to be less 'offensive", which adds to plot problems. Add to the fact that they never explore really why he is a racist bigot as well or why he believes the founding fathers were holy figures or his hatred of Lincoln. It handles social themes poorly as a result, and really, I think Levine just had them in just to give his game more edge.
Simply put, Levine is a bad character writer outside of Ryan, Tenebaum (but the Bioshock 2 DLC writers made her an even better character), and SHODAN. The supporting characters are especially one dimensional who only exist to throw bad guys at you or go crazy. The slippery slope is only a short ways away. See Fink, Slate, and Fitzroy (and the DLC explanation retcon is flat out idiotic), as well as Steinman, Cohen, and even Fontaine.
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
However, that's not character establishment, that's not fleshing out characters. Never in the story is Comstock's beliefs flashed out or Booker's backstory other than Wounded Knee. In fact the fact that Booker's quest is "forced" by the Luteces instead of his own will makes his characterization even worse. Elizabeth got most of the focus when the game should have been about Booker.
there’s nothing wrong with character establishment maybe you found it bad because in bioshock the appearance versus reality and consider this that Booker’s the hero of story is not the star of story besides he’s tragic hero and as a tragic hero he has many flaws so you don’t have to like him. The beauty of bioshock doesn’t revolve around characters but the themes and the mystery. This game is a mockery of utopianism and people like Zachary Comstock who are trying to change the existing conditions by making a Utopia
You are missing the point. The point is that the characters were not well established. They are never explored. There just "are". And I am talking about just Infinite because Ryan and Lamb in the first two games, are well established. In fact, learning that Sophia Lamb's views were influenced by her father fits so well with Bioshock 2's themes.
Comstock is a very underdeveloped and poorly established villain. There is no place anywhere to even explain why he is evil and why he has the religion he does. In fact, there are clues that during development, Comstock was supposed to be full on Christian far right, which was basically completely changed in the final version to start his own religion so to be less 'offensive", which adds to plot problems. Add to the fact that they never explore really why he is a racist bigot as well or why he believes the founding fathers were holy figures or his hatred of Lincoln. It handles social themes poorly as a result, and really, I think Levine just had them in just to give his game more edge.
Simply put, Levine is a bad character writer outside of Ryan, Tenebaum (but the Bioshock 2 DLC writers made her an even better character), and SHODAN. The supporting characters are especially one dimensional who only exist to throw bad guys at you or go crazy. The slippery slope is only a short ways away. See Fink, Slate, and Fitzroy (and the DLC explanation retcon is flat out idiotic), as well as Steinman, Cohen, and even Fontaine.
I know what you mean and I give you that Zachary Comstock can’t hold a candle to Andrew Ryan or Sofia lamb as a charismatic and influential character but you need to be more specific. Do you want to criticize him for being a bad antagonist or having no backstory? For instance you say there’s no explanation why Comstock hates Lincoln so much, on the contrary there’s a good explanation for that; Comstock is a confederate who believes in slavery and racial profiling while Lincoln is the one person who abolished slavery and his 1860 election victory was one of main reasons that caused civil war and we know no one hates war like a soldier hates war.
Bioshock Infinite, its ending got one of the best and most memorable ending in video game history ... imo.Shooting mechanics was solid compared to Deus Ex HR.
I know Lulu_Lulu will probably get mad at mention of Infinite lol.
Deux ex was defenitly a good game but not great , it had many flaws like too much hacking minigames, not enough free roam , not challenging , not enough (hard) enemies, not enough content.
But the artwork was great and the gameplay was really nice at certain times.
As for bioshock infinite, I was a bioshock fan but bioshock infinite can't catch my attention. A flying city with balloons ? One sniper is all it takes to take the whole damn thing down and that's just breaks the whole game for me. The whole feeling of the game is also bit off, they overdid in that game I think but it must be me since a lot of gamers like the game.
Bioshock series looks really foul artistically. Old decrepit insane and depressing people and placed. Lots of deliberately ugly and deranged character models.
It's just disturbing and ugly looking.
In contrast, Deus Ex Human Revolution looks futuristic, clean and inviting.
And the best looking game of all time artistically is Mirror's Edge, that one is just a therapy to the eyes and mind.
they never bothered fleshing out the protagonist and antagonist either
good one
Please tell me, whats the link between Comstock/Booker having a Christian baptism and then starting his own religion (which was supposed to be right wing Christianity itself until they changed it)? Why is he a racist white supremacist bigot? Why is he who he is? Hell, even the wiki won't tell me.
Never fleshes it out, never goes in detail. His character has holes. He just "is". And all Booker was is a sad drunk who was at Wounded Knee who sells his daughter. Little character establishment.
To pull of this twist you have to have well established characters. Infinite does not.
Booker DeWitt and Zachary Comstock represent different aspects of the sinner: DeWitt is the sinner penitent, while Comstock is the sinner unpenitent. Sin creates a cycle of pain and death that cannot be broken by anyone caught in it.
However, that's not character establishment, that's not fleshing out characters. Never in the story is Comstock's beliefs flashed out or Booker's backstory other than Wounded Knee. In fact the fact that Booker's quest is "forced" by the Luteces instead of his own will makes his characterization even worse. Elizabeth got most of the focus when the game should have been about Booker.
there’s nothing wrong with character establishment maybe you found it bad because in bioshock the appearance versus reality and consider this that Booker’s the hero of story is not the star of story besides he’s tragic hero and as a tragic hero he has many flaws so you don’t have to like him. The beauty of bioshock doesn’t revolve around characters but the themes and the mystery. This game is a mockery of utopianism and people like Zachary Comstock who are trying to change the existing conditions by making a Utopia
You are missing the point. The point is that the characters were not well established. They are never explored. There just "are". And I am talking about just Infinite because Ryan and Lamb in the first two games, are well established. In fact, learning that Sophia Lamb's views were influenced by her father fits so well with Bioshock 2's themes.
Comstock is a very underdeveloped and poorly established villain. There is no place anywhere to even explain why he is evil and why he has the religion he does. In fact, there are clues that during development, Comstock was supposed to be full on Christian far right, which was basically completely changed in the final version to start his own religion so to be less 'offensive", which adds to plot problems. Add to the fact that they never explore really why he is a racist bigot as well or why he believes the founding fathers were holy figures or his hatred of Lincoln. It handles social themes poorly as a result, and really, I think Levine just had them in just to give his game more edge.
Simply put, Levine is a bad character writer outside of Ryan, Tenebaum (but the Bioshock 2 DLC writers made her an even better character), and SHODAN. The supporting characters are especially one dimensional who only exist to throw bad guys at you or go crazy. The slippery slope is only a short ways away. See Fink, Slate, and Fitzroy (and the DLC explanation retcon is flat out idiotic), as well as Steinman, Cohen, and even Fontaine.
I know what you mean and I give you that Zachary Comstock can’t hold a candle to Andrew Ryan or Sofia lamb as a charismatic and influential character but you need to be more specific. Do you want to criticize him for being a bad antagonist or having no backstory? For instance you say there’s no explanation why Comstock hates Lincoln so much, on the contrary there’s a good explanation for that; Comstock is a confederate who believes in slavery and racial profiling while Lincoln is the one person who abolished slavery and his 1860 election victory was one of main reasons that caused civil war and we know no one hates war like a soldier hates war.
I am criticizing him for both. And no where in the game is info that he was a confederate. He has very little backstory. That's the problem.
@texasgoldrush: then I think you forgot about fraternal order of raven ! c,mon man a holy portrait of John Wilkes Booth were hanged on every walls of columbia
Enjoyed BS:I way more. Partly because of the presentation (artstyle, music, acting). I also found the gameplay more enjoyable overall. Wanted to really like DE:HR, but I kind of had to push myself to finish it.
@texasgoldrush: then I think you forgot about fraternal order of raven ! c,mon man a holy portrait of John Wilkes Booth were hanged on every walls of columbia
No, I remembered that part...that has nothing to do with Comstocks development. Once again, why does Comstock turn to this religious figure and starts his own religion after being baptized? They never explain. What was required to make the end work is explain through good character work, why Booker will always become who he was when he rejects the baptism and why Comstock always becomes what he is if he excepts the baptism. they never do. They hand wave it and the story fails on a character level.
And they did not even bother to explain a Vox version of the Raven in the Bank of the Prophets.
Log in to comment