|
SirDan3k posted:blunders face first into a pile of racist as hell. You say that like they didn't intentionally write this as incredibly racist and classist.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
"This twist is bullshit!" the thread screamed, hurling George Orwell's Animal Farm against the wall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 04:38
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
The bullshit screaming is mainly because the game has now said, 'violently standing up against oppression is just as bad, if not worse, than creating that system of oppression, maintaining that system of oppression, and profiting off that system of oppression'. And that's kind of an upsetting thing to see in a video game if you're part of any group that's ever been oppressed! It didn't have to do this to the Vox, having Daisy smear blood on her face and OH NO, NOT THE CHILDREN, SHE'S SO TERRIBLE! It could just as easily have gone, 'okay, Elizabeth is freaking the gently caress out over how violent a real revolution is, because she had no idea it would be anything other than Do You Hear The People Sing. Booker knew all along they were like this and didn't expect Daisy to be Ghandi or anything, and he just wants his airship, so whatever.' Obviously the Vox Populi weren't going to be your allies forever (and really, barely were to start with), but it could have been less hamfisted and awkward and served the same purpose in both story and gameplay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 04:55
|
|
|
Not to mention the blatantly racist implication that Daisy Fitzroy (the token black character in the game) is little more than a feral beast, wanting to kill them white people.
Horseshoe theory fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
The big problem is that the voxophones from comstock and others say that the blacks have to be oppressed because they're bloodthirsty, violent animals, and only white people can run a society, and then the writers have Fitzroy and the Vox populi prove them right. As a black person playing this game, this is pretty much what racists have been complaining that blacks are like for years so it's a little bit of a slap in the face. I've bought and played through all the games in the series and this is the lowest point by far.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
At the risk of repeating myself; Such commentary as Bioshock Infinite makes, it makes with the effortless grace known only to two hundred million dollar triple A action adventure videogames.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Drakyn posted:Like, I don't think anyone is under the illusion that all rebellions are just like Star Wars, yeah! but the level of heinousness that's going to need to be committed by this particular set of revolutionaries to make this situation as South Park as it is desperately trying to be is going to have to be loving absurd. (Weirdly enough, I think the way the music and framing tries to make us feel shaken when Daisy takes out Fink almost makes me angrier than the OH NO THE BABIES - it's loving FINK, you just finished showing us what an infinitely huge piece of poo poo he is, we started universe-hopping because his town's cops murdertortured a guy we wanted to talk to. A bullet to the head is probably much too kindly.) DeusExMachinima posted:"This twist is bullshit!" the thread screamed, hurling George Orwell's Animal Farm against the wall. Animal Farm was pointing at the two biggest bullies and calling them out for being fuckers to everybody smaller in the playground, and moreover for being the same fucker with different shirts. This game is pointing at the biggest kid and his favorite wedgie target and saying hey, we all already know that what the bully is doing is absolutely wrong no question at all no doubt nuh-uh what a shame and a disgrace, but what if that little kid like, went nuts and stabbed the big guy in his sleep and ate his heart and killed his dog and burned down his house and called his mother rude names or something? I mean, you know those little kids, thirsting for violence and blood at the drop of a hat, always overreacting. Makes you think. Except it doesn't make you think, it's meant to make you go 'oh okay Bad Thing is bad but trying to stop it is worse and besides nothing in real life is as bad as Bad Thing' and then stop thinking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
And now any and all subtlety or for that matter valid criticism is discarded. It's all downhill from here, folks. Oh, and you've gotta love how the sad music plays as the bestial revolutionaries sack this prosperous factory of industry, and then upon a single command every single Vox soldier turns on the "hero" who just saved their lives taking down a zeppelin. Because all revolutionaries and oppressed peoples evidently share a hive-mind. This game, guys. This game. Rarely have I ever seen so toxic a reactionary appeal, considering the grotesque racial violence and classism displayed up to this point - to turn around and say, as others have said, "Surprise! The downtrodden actually are terrible! Woe, for they have ruined the idyllic floating paradise!" is, at the very best, socially irresponsible in the extreme in a political climate of resurgent anti-labor and racist sentiment. Fitzroy is in every respect an obscene equivocation of oppressor and oppressed. Even her design, evoking the trappings of famous revolutionaries for social justice like Harriet Tubman, is incredibly tone-deaf. In a nutshell: This game does not care one iota about the suffering of the oppressed. It is purely concerned with exploiting them to look smarter than it is. It's not that the Vox end up your antagonists - it's that they're less than human, savages whose motives are never examined, a mindless and faceless host of the Dangerous Underclasses. Jetrauben fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:12
|
|
|
Flesnolk posted:You say that like they didn't intentionally write this as incredibly racist and classist. I don't think that's what they set out to do because I can't imagine any sane triple A developer deciding that was how they were going to roll. They thought they we're turning the oppressed revolution is always good narrative on it's head not realizing through the casual racism and authorial tunnel vision they essentially made a "Dem Negroes gons' kill yo' chillins" statement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:19
|
|
|
Jetrauben posted:This game, guys. This game. Rarely have I ever seen so toxic a reactionary appeal, considering the grotesque racial violence and classism displayed up to this point - to turn around and say, as others have said, "Surprise! The downtrodden actually are terrible! Woe, for they have ruined the idyllic floating paradise!" is, at the very best, socially irresponsible in the extreme in a political climate of resurgent anti-labor and racist sentiment. Unless the message from the beginning was, power corrupts, and war never changes, nor do people except by their circumstances. Was Daisy Fitzroy supposed to be a champion of race alone? Were you expecting her from the beginning to be an agent of benevolent change? First time we see her, she shoves Booker out of the goddamned airship. Two realities later, she's reveling in getting her revenge. I don't blame anyone for feeling a particular way about these characters, especially if you see your own face reflected. I think we would be less bothered had she not decided to wipe blood on her own face like war paint.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:22
|
|
|
It's so refreshing to see people not treating this game as the first coming of videogame Jesus. It's an enjoyable game with a lot of cool moments, but the story is just so flawed. I blame the fact they basically redid a lot of the game multiple times, you can see it in trailers how there's a ton of stuff that's different or completely missing. One of those scalps we saw, belonged to a character in one of the trailers, who was intended to be an antagonist like Fink, but I guess was a casualty in more ways than one, cause he's obviously already dead despite us never getting to interact with him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:28
|
|
|
J.theYellow posted:Unless the message from the beginning was, power corrupts, and war never changes, nor do people except by their circumstances. Was Daisy Fitzroy supposed to be a champion of race alone? Were you expecting her from the beginning to be an agent of benevolent change? First time we see her, she shoves Booker out of the goddamned airship. Two realities later, she's reveling in getting her revenge. It's an equivalency that can be argued but it's utterly tone deaf in the face of reality where a people were oppressed in the same way and arguments actually used to keep them oppressed were "They'll be even worse then us if we let them be in charge."
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:30
|
|
|
J.theYellow posted:Unless the message from the beginning was, power corrupts, and war never changes, nor do people except by their circumstances. Was Daisy Fitzroy supposed to be a champion of race alone? Were you expecting her from the beginning to be an agent of benevolent change? First time we see her, she shoves Booker out of the goddamned airship. Two realities later, she's reveling in getting her revenge. See, that's the laziest message humanly possible here. "Both sides are bad!" is absolute reactionary nonsense, an excuse to change nothing and allow the status quo to continue, when one side is literally the only slightly exaggerated historic attitudes of too many white Americans against nonwhites (again, at this point "white" does not include Jews, Irish, Slavs, or many other groups as well as non-European ethnicities) and the other are the downtrodden and oppressed. The game has absolutely no interest in characterizing the Vox beyond "dangerous". The problem is that Daisy is given no real motive to be so cartoonishly malicious. She is instantly equivocated with the very worst of American racism. First she's shown as casually treacherous for the flimsiest of reasons. Then a platonic White Child is spawned from the ether purely for her to menace and therefore prove she is beyond redemption and must be cut down. And who is this kid? We don't know. He's just a symbol. He vanishes literally the second he's saved. Revolutions like the Vox are not the historic majority, especially American history. Most of the time either the workers were lightly-armed and easily crushed by the oppressors, or their political actions were largely nonviolent. They were the victims, not the victimizers. Infinite literally conflates them together, and asks us to weep for the racists getting their comeuppance. It is entirely more concerned with the story of two white Americans (or at least Americans who can pass for white) than it is with the historically oppressed, whose suffering it exploits for shock value and to look smarter and more thoughtful than it actually is. In the context of a game that delves with American exceptionalism - or at least evokes so much ugly American race-and-class imagery - this indifference to historical oppression is toxic. Infinite chose to make the case that oppression is bad but resisting oppression is worse. Daisy Fitzroy was already shown as casually vindictive, dangerous, utterly uninterested in coexistence - she was the privileged group's nightmare of "those uppity ___" from one of the very earliest voxophones we got from her, when she basically said she was going to butcher the whites. That did not mean that the writers' choice to set this racist caricature up was any less objectionable. This update just confirmed what we already could guess - that the writers are at best ham-fisted or cowardly, and at worst actually believe that armed revolt against hideously unjust oppression with no peaceful avenue left open for reform is just as bad, if not worse, than that oppression. Kurieg posted:One of my friends pet theories was that the reason why there was such a sudden shift in Fitzroy's character is because that's just how Red Universe's Fitzroy is, ruthless and vengeful. Whereas Blue Fitzroy was more tit for tat. Yeah, one problem with this, and it's entirely based in all these alternate-reality nonsense shifts. Daisy Fitzroy isn't a character. Daisy Fitzroy, by now, is just a memetic pattern. You're dealing with an archetype, not a consistent identity. All continuity has been discarded. Jetrauben fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:33
|
|
|
You know what? I'm going to assume that kid Daisy was trying to kill was Damien Thorn and so Booker and Elizabeth have now aided the Antichrist on his mission to bring the End of Days. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 06:59
|
|
|
One possible interpretation is that this reality has a more successful revolution exactly because this Daisy is a ruthless monster, and blah blah staring into the abyss blah blah becoming the monster blah blah. That's overly charitable to the game, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
Jetrauben posted:Oh, and you've gotta love how the sad music plays as the bestial revolutionaries sack this prosperous factory of industry, and then upon a single command every single Vox soldier turns on the "hero" who just saved their lives taking down a zeppelin. Because all revolutionaries and oppressed peoples evidently share a hive-mind. It's possible I haven't played enough FPSes but I don't remember ever playing one where allies were suddenly told to kill you and then some of them go 'Wait what?' and then decide to not do so and make their own decision on it. Sounds like standard video game enemy hive minds to me. Like how if you kill one person then everyone knows your exact position even if they're up on a catwalk on the other side of a room.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:33
|
|
|
I would think the child is either Fink's son or his nephew. I remember the kid being there when Fink died...
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 08:52
|
|
|
Feinne posted:One possible interpretation is that this reality has a more successful revolution exactly because this Daisy is a ruthless monster, and blah blah staring into the abyss blah blah becoming the monster blah blah. That's overly charitable to the game, though. Well, this Fitzroy was allied with Booker and Slate. I could see how that would make her more ruthless, but it's incredibly unlikely the writers thought of that or they would have included voxophones about it and made it a point that she was different here. Instead they just have Booker and Elizabeth continually make claims that she's a bad person all along the way, until they're evidently shown proof of it after they've already come to the conclusion without any. RareAcumen posted:It's possible I haven't played enough FPSes but I don't remember ever playing one where allies were suddenly told to kill you and then some of them go 'Wait what?' and then decide to not do so and make their own decision on it. Sounds like standard video game enemy hive minds to me. Like how if you kill one person then everyone knows your exact position even if they're up on a catwalk on the other side of a room. That's not really a limitation of the medium though, but of the writing. I think Infinite's biggest flaw is that they wanted to write something deep but got in over their head, and it can be a real doozy of a flaw with some of the concepts they tried to work in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
Little late to the party this time, but here I go:
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Just repeat to yourself "it's just a game, I should really just relax." The social commentary of every game in the Bioshock series gets blown way out of proportion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:16
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:Just repeat to yourself "it's just a game, I should really just relax." The social commentary of every game in the Bioshock series gets blown way out of proportion. Yeah, I'm with this. The Fitzroy thing was a terrible idea. I mean a massive, earth-shatteringly terrible idea. For many many reasons. But I don't think it follows that the entire Bioshock staff sat down together and said "Let's be evil racists because we hate minorities so." I mean, if this really upset someone, that's completely legitimate. I'm not trying to dismiss someone's outrage out of hand. This is the kind of bad decision that can easily leave people enraged. But I'd prefer to assume incompetence before I assume malice. I've seen characters butchered like this before when the writer has no idea how to fork his unearned point over onto the viewer/reader/whatnot. It's surprisingly easy to do when you're wrapped up in writing something, and fail to take a step back to see what you're actually doing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
I pretty much expected the Vox to turn on Booker from the very start and such I had no problem what so ever in blowing them all away, Booker's only here for Elizabeth, everything else is irrelevant after all!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:23
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:Just repeat to yourself "it's just a game, I should really just relax." The social commentary of every game in the Bioshock series gets blown way out of proportion. The games have always been about the individual not the world around them. That child Elisabeth sacrificed her innocence to save? Well he might have just run screaming off the side of the platform and plummeted to his death as far as we know but who cares? He's done his job in the actual plot. The revolution is set dressing, it's failings thoughtless and pointless because the story is about how it effects Booker and Elizabeth on a personal level and nothing else. Daisy isn't a character or even some kind of archetypal meme, she's a plot device her actions dictated by what is best for the actual character's growth the writer has planned. Which is all grand but for the love of christ think out the window dressing a tiny bit more next time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 09:43
|
|
|
GenHavoc posted:Yeah, I'm with this. The Fitzroy thing was a terrible idea. I mean a massive, earth-shatteringly terrible idea. For many many reasons. But I don't think it follows that the entire Bioshock staff sat down together and said "Let's be evil racists because we hate minorities so." Incompetence or malice is irrelevant to the criticism at hand. There's not much actual difference between them here. After evoking so much racist and classist awfulness, Infinite has a responsibility to use that imagery to make a thoughtful point. And after marketing itself so heavily as this criticism of American Exceptionalism, it has no right to squander it so much for the problems of two admittedly well-written and charming characters. Because really, what's the point being made here? "Revolution is worse than oppression!"? Or as a friend put it: "Surprise! The downtrodden are actually terrible!"? I mean, seriously, the game just immediately shifted from showing us the most callous racism and oppression a nightmarish parody of American exceptionalism had to offer - to asking us to feel sympathy and pity for the screaming and terrified racist citizens of that state. Does it much matter if they were malicious or if they were simply thoughtless? If anything, thoughtlessness is more damning, isn't it? It's the very definition of exploitative media.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 12:11
|
|
|
Almost everyone seems to be saying the same thing, so I thought I'd try to break up the monotony:
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 12:54
|
|
|
Jetrauben posted:Incompetence or malice is irrelevant to the criticism at hand. There's not much actual difference between them here. It matters when we start throwing the word 'racist' around so freely and applying it to people. It matters when we start talking about what games are and are not allowed to do in a medium that's inherently both subjective and collaborative. At this point, we're no longer discussing the game being bad or good, we're discussing it being evil. If that's the conversation we want to have, then we can have it, but let's acknowledge what we're talking about. I see the game as having made a serious, possibly fatal mis-step in what was previously a very coherent, excellent, and thought-provoking narrative. You see the game as having committed a vile betrayal, perhaps even a crime, in making this mis-step. Perhaps you are right. But let us not pretend that we are talking about the same thing. The shift that the game made with Fitzroy was both unearned and stupid, and in the wider context of the point they had previously been making, was unforgivably thoughtless in the best possible interpretation. It destroys all of the work they had put together in presenting a society crushed under the rule of a racist, hyper-classist theocracy by suddenly implying (if not outright saying) that everyone was morally equal the whole time. Such notions are pernicious horseshit on even the most basic level, so much so I have trouble imagining that was what they were trying to say. Perhaps you're right that it ultimately doesn't matter what they were trying to say, because this is what they did say. I can't argue against that. But I do not believe it is unacceptable for a game to try and show that even in the most justifiable revolution, there are innocent casualties. I do not believe it is unacceptable for the game to attempt to humanize, and yes, evoke sympathy for, a class of people who were previously racist oppressors, under the theory that most people are not uniformly evil or good. I do not believe it is unacceptable for Daisy Fitzroy to gun Fink down in cold blood, or for the Vox to make grisly trophies out of their oppressors' dead bodies. These are things that happen in violent revolutions, even the most sanctified ones. The people being revolutioned against are terrified. They fear to be murdered by "the mob", and on occasion, are so-murdered, which is often why they strike back so hard. I believe it is perfectly possible to show these things while still retaining in mind the fundamental "rightness" of the Vox' cause, a cause I don't think anyone here would fail to champion. The Vox are, unquestionably, right to revolt against the Founders, and to kill and destroy their oppressors. Despite this, terrible things will happen in the course of the revolt. That is not objectionable to me. What is objectionable is the implication, intentional or not, that the Vox are not right to revolt, or have placed themselves on the same level as the Founders. That implication is vile and contemptible. But it is an implication borne of a ten-second climax to a character arc that was (hopefully) not thought out at all. Maybe that's the most important thing the game will ever do. Maybe not. There's other things going on in the game besides this terrible, terrible failure of characterization that we saw here. But if all we take away from this is "this game, its makers, and all its works are racists", then there's nothing left to say. All I'm asking is that we not shut the rest of the conversation down before it happens with blanket declarations as to the intent of people we don't know regarding a game we haven't seen the end of. I simply have a very hard time believing that the same people who created that fairground scene with the mixed-race couple did so because they secretly wanted to make a game about how black people are savage killers. And if they didn't, it's perhaps valuable to examine what it was they were trying to say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 13:09
|
|
|
I still think people are trying to think much deeper thoughts than the game is trying to present. It's not trying to say "these people are ultimately good" or "these people are ultimately bad", it's Booker trying to rescue/kidnap (depending on point of view) Elizabeth while an unstable "utopian society" collapses around them. In Bioshock 1 we had Ryan's Objectivist utopia crumble first due to corruption (Fontaine's smuggling/ADAM development butting heads with Ryan's ego) and later open revolt by the workers it derided and relied on led by Atlas. In Infinite the same thing happens; a Kingdom of God built on the backs of slaves, then corruption (Lady Comstock's death and the events surrounding it) allows Fitzroy to become a symbol and seed of rebellion. Like Atlas's motivations (viewed from a distance and ignoring things revealed in the first game) this is a good cause to fight for but actual revolutions themselves generally boil down to "kill those fuckers, then we can figure things out." "Just" or not, revolutions are not things you want to be in the middle of. We're in this game's version of New Year's Eve 1959, and when you're trying to get out of something like that alive everybody's looking pretty monstrous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 13:59
|
|
|
I can't take the message this game has very seriously ever since Cornelius Slate showed up. After that it was semented to me that pretty much everyone in the game is out to kill Booker for the flimsiest of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
The problem, as I see it, is this: 1) The game made a great deal of racism, classicism and oppression towards non-privileged (i.e. white) members of Columbian society, with the implication that it's needed because the non-whites need it, that they would be lost to their savage nature without being herded. It had shown an amount of oppression worthy of revolution (not that it should be quantified, but hopefully you get my point) All throughout this I was wondering what was it leading to, other than an obvious revolt. 2) The game has shown a revolution of those oppressed people, instantly having one character equating leaders of both groups, and not half an hour later it was proven that Fitzroy actually is as bad, if not worse, than Comstock, that she is a savage and a mad person that has to be put down like a rabid animal - and since she is the only face of the revolution that we have, by extension her character is attributed to the Vox Populi (hell, even the Columbians have more screen time in the first hour of the game or so) now, adding: 3) The game is, rightly or wrongly, said to have an intricate story that is deep and well thought out, and one would assume that the writers did thought of the implication of their plot developments and I feel comfortable judging it harshly, because if it wasn't supposed to be looked at critically, then why hype it so? Also, an idea that a revolution stemming from years of oppression would turn violent and ugly is one of the most trite and shallow ones I can think of. All in all, I will reserve my final judgement until the plot have ended, but so far it has lost a lot of goodwill. Also, if I really shouldn't think about the story too much, then that's fine, but then it shouldn't be hyped so much, should it? Well, it did win a VGX award for the best shooter, not best story. And using In a word, Fedule's right 
Szurumbur fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Dec 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:02
|
|
|
supermikhail posted:Almost everyone seems to be saying the same thing, so I thought I'd try to break up the monotony: Elizabeth and the Songbirds. I can see it now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:12
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:Elizabeth and the Songbirds. I can see it now. This made enough neurons fire that I *just* realized Hannah Montana is a remake of Jem and the Holograms. I'm not sure how to feel about knowing enough about both shows to figure that out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:27
|
|
|
Szurumbur posted:3) The game is, rightly or wrongly, said to have an intricate story that is deep and well thought out, and one would assume that the writers did thought of the implication of their plot developments and I feel comfortable judging it harshly, because if it wasn't supposed to be looked at critically, then why hype it so? Also, an idea that a revolution stemming from years of oppression would turn violent and ugly is one of the most trite and shallow ones I can think of. Yeah, I suppose that's fair. I'm really not trying to minimize the impact this terrible idea had, nor saying we shouldn't judge it on its own merits. I just don't want the rest of the thread to be us debating whether this person or that one is a racist because of this game. My own feelings on Infinite are very complicated in the wake of this disaster. And I do want to see where the game goes in the wake of this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:38
|
|
|
If it makes people feel better, I don't think anyone ever has or will go into or take away their principles of morality from Bioshock games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:46
|
|
|
I liked this game better when it was exploring a floating 1910s city with music from the later half of the 20th century, and meeting strange time/dimension travelling twins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:52
|
|
|
Ever since this LP started, I've had the suspicion that the entire game is taking place inside Booker's head, as a metaphor for his internal struggle dealing with the violence and losses of his past. Normally "it was all a dream" is a lovely cop-out of a dramatic device, but in this case it's the best explanation I can imagine for all the nonsensical stuff we've seen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 14:59
|
|
|
No. That would be the worst. "It was all a dream" is always the worst.Bruceski posted:Just repeat to yourself "it's just a game, I should really just relax." The social commentary of every game in the Bioshock series gets blown way out of proportion. Yes, but they're so easy to troll! Drakyn posted:George Orwell was criticizing the assholish behavior of two enormously powerful economic and political ideologies that, although diametrically opposed, inflicted suspiciously identical kinds of horrible poo poo on the vast majority of the people that lived within them. One of this game's pair of opposing factions is this sort of systemic poo poo-machine, and the other is the people that get shat on the hardest by it. If this isn't your reading of Fitzroy from the start I don't know what to tell you. Ironically, the devs said that they took inspiration from revolutionary thought around the early 1900's when coming up with the Vox (amongst other things). Animal Farm was taken from the exact same time frame partly inspired by the WW1 Russian revolution... and the idea of "pulling it up from the roots" ain't exactly foreign to that school. If most of these posters can't separate that from their own personal social justice crusade then that's pretty amusing. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
I especially like the poster whose complaint boils down to "how dare they make me feel compassion for bourgie racist scum screaming as they die, ugh!" There never was a revolution that didn't end well, right everyone? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I especially like the poster whose complaint boils down to "how dare they make me feel compassion for bourgie racist scum screaming as they die, ugh!" There never was a revolution that didn't end well, right everyone? Thing is, it could've been perfectly acceptable to show you how violent and bloody revolution is in order to make a point that violence begets more violence in endless escalation. I don't think there'd have been as much of a problem with that, and it would in fact have made sense. God drat if I'm going to give a poo poo about how many of those assholes I murder if I'd been forced to live off their scraps and work for them 16 hours a day. It's just that this incredibly sudden and mostly nonsensical 180 on you is really stupid, it could have afforded to be more gradual, maybe with you stopping Vox acts against civilians in the streets or something, thus giving them a perfectly good reason to turn around and hate you, or maybe you trying to get to their zeppelins and they for whatever reason obstructing you. There were a lot of ways to make this plot turn probably not an original idea but at least a well executed one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:46
|
|
|
Is Songbird completely mechanical, or it is hybrid like the handymen? If the latter, does that mean that dead Lady Comstock is at the helm? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:58 |
|
|
As of the latest update, there's nothing that explains how Songbird functions. Maybe we'll find out sometime! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2013 17:25
|
|