Comments | equustel: Would you kindly go get stepped on by a Big Daddy?

equustel

Would you kindly go get stepped on by a Big Daddy?

Feb 23, 2009 12:39

Oh, BioShock. Why? Why are you so awesome? And why must you devastate me so greatly?

Atlas. I feel like sounding off a big, melodramatic "Nooooooo!" with echo effects. I knew something had to be up, but I didn't want to believe the worst. Which is altogether silly of me, considering this game has pulled no punches so far when it comes to ( Read more... )

homg, gaming, bioshock

Comments 3

trinityvixen February 23 2009, 22:16:24 UTC

Bioshock was such a beautiful, intricate little game. I have been waiting for you to get to the spoiler revelation, and I'm glad it blew you away as much as it did me. I didn't actually play it--for reasons you state: it's too intense for me, so I watched my roommate play it. She needed me, too; she was half afraid to play it without company!

I'm waiting on the sequel more than the movie. The more and more cinematic video games become, the easier it ought to be to translate their stories into films. That's the theory, anyway. The reality is that cinematic games aren't really benefited by being made into movies; they're already so good that adaptations are bound to be less entertaining in comparison. I would be totally disappointed in a Bioshock movie that didn't match up to the game's atmospheric setting and horror. It would be entirely thrilling to see the sets of the game realized in 3D space, with human people interacting with the decay and the decadence. But if it tried to bog itself down in what it isn't, I would never forgive ( ... )

equustel February 26 2009, 02:21:48 UTC

The reality is that cinematic games aren't really benefited by being made into movies; they're already so good that adaptations are bound to be less entertaining in comparison.

Seriously! That's how I feel. Nowadays, the challenge of game adaptations will be matching the artistry already present, more than developing the material to be more cinematic. Beyond placing the story in a third-person context, the narrative of BioShock pretty much writes itself. (I think Gore Verbinksi said that's precisely what drew him to the project.)

But that's a long way off, and who knows how it'll turn out. Right now, I have much more confidence and flail for the SEQUEL. d00d.

trinityvixen February 26 2009, 02:30:24 UTC

SEEEEEQUEL!!!

Of course, I've no idea how well that will or won't turn out; the idea of the city rising to the surface is fascinating, but it does ruin the horror-movie cliche of the haunted house if you can leave it. (The best horror always has a very good reason why you can't get away from the monster; Alien set it in space, BioShock put the house under water.) I wonder what the city on the surface will offer as a temptation? And will the hero be the same or someone new? The problem with sequels is that they challenge endings. The problem with videogame sequels is that they may end differently, and BioShock did--it had two endings, both of which were world-shattering. (I won't spoil, but it's not really a spoiler. You've already reached the biggest reveal of the game.) Which really happened? How about neither? Wouldn't it have to be neither for there to still be more world for the same or another hero to play in ( ... )