No Gods or Kings: Objectivism and Ayn Rand in BioShock

http://kotaku.com/354717/no-gods-or-kings-objectivism-in-bioshock

by robg • 18 years ago

36 47 18 years ago

cbetz• 18 years ago

If you have not played this game, you must. It is easily one of the best games I have ever played. The story is really that good.

s3graham• 18 years ago

I've heard this repeated a lot, but honestly I found the story trite, and the combat pretty generic after a few levels. Maybe I was hoping for too much though. YMMV, of course.

prospero4• 18 years ago

I think video games are held to a different (lower) standard than most other mediums with respect to storytelling. This is a shame, but there's a good reason: you can't embed a narrative inside emergent, non-formulaic gameplay. Either you tell a story with how you limit the player's actions, or you don't tell any story at all.

But even if you accept that as a fundamental limitation of the medium, most video games still have horrible stories. With the exception of Valve and a few others, it seems like no one's even trying. I don't think BioShock is the apex of video game development, but it's certainly a cut above almost everything else. That may not be much, but it's something.

josefresco• 18 years ago

I'll buy anything not published and DRM'd by EA.

Zev• 18 years ago

A. The activation limit in BioShock was already removed, and Ken Levine has said that once sales aren't a concern anymore, they'll (2K Games) will remove the online activation as well. So DRM isn't a huge issue here

B. It's not published by EA, but rather 2K Games. Which is owned by Take Two, not EA (which hasn't managed to acquire Take Two yet).

bendotc3• 18 years ago

Then I guess you'll buy Bioshock.

And you should, too. For those of us interested in videogames as an artistic medium, this is one of the most exciting games out there.

unalone9• 18 years ago

That's a slight exaggeration. I think it reveals an exciting trend, but the game itself fails artistically. Its gameplay is more or less generic, and its story has a great concept but poor execution.

Portal, on the other hand, or Half-Life 2... Those games seem to get dismissed by the "games are art" crowd, or at least not brought up. I've never understood that. And Psychonauts, Killer 7, Shadow of the Colossus... But I think that the real innovative games don't get the same level of heralding because people who find those games know that games have been artistic since at least the NES stage. Final Fantasy II/IV, anybody? Zelda?

rantfoil• 18 years ago

This article is truly fascinating. Having read Ayn Rand, and briefly taken by the stark ideology, it all falls into place. I suddenly have a deeper appreciation for the gameplay, the philosophy, and the artwork of Bioshock.

I love the commentary too -- it's both an homage and a cautionary tale. Bioshock starts as a utopia and de-evolves into an awful dystopia.

davidw• 18 years ago

If it weren't terribly off topic and likely to lead to pointless flame wars, that might make for a fun poll. "At what age did you go through your Ayn Rand phase? How long did it last?"

msg• 18 years ago

17, 6 months

I would be interested in knowing how many are still under the baleful Eye as well.

orib2• 18 years ago

Personally, I read it and half-agreed, half-disagreed. Her ideals are powerful and moving. It would be great if people could be like that, but they aren't. Plus, her characters seem to have a few too many tantrums and blow up buildings ;-)

Overall, I ended up incorporating elements of her philosophy into my world view, but rejecting other parts. I'd still highly recommmend her books to anyone, but really, if you're not willing to think about what the books say and blindly follow what she outlines as her philosophy... well. you've just become one of the sheep that she heaps so much contempt on in her books.

gunderson6• 18 years ago

Or in other words, when did you give up on your childish ideas about the heights of your own human potential?

ank7ovy7• 18 years ago

The Economist actually used Bioshock as an analogy for one of its articles:

"IN “BIOSHOCK”, a hit video game from last year that was heavily influenced by the libertarian philosophy of Ayn Rand, the main villain builds a fantastical city under the sea, where businesses can escape the stifling grasp of government. If you are an internationally minded entrepreneur looking to set up a small to medium-sized business, that is probably going a little far. But where should you set up shop?"

http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=...

nazgulnarsil• 18 years ago

even afterpatching mine crashes and I can't figure out why. it only seems to happen when I am picking up money off a corpse.

0x44• 18 years ago

Your game isn't crashing, it's protesting your strong-arm tactics toward taxation.

/tongue-in-cheek.

jonny_noog7• 18 years ago

I'm not going to say that I don't find some of Ayn Rand's ideas interesting, but some of the comments attributed to Yaron Brook in that article are just plain scary.

"It seems to me that he's misrepresented what Ayn Rand believes and her ideals beyond objectivism," he said. "He's setting it up to fail. He believes , based on what I've read, that any system that is absolutist is ultimately going to lead to disastrous effect. Any system of black and white, any system of ultimate morality."

I'm sure a system of "ultimate morality" would work just fine for me... if I was defining the "ultimate morality".

"I think its flawed logic in the sense that he thinks that people have to be flawed"

"I think there are great people and perfect people and I think we all should strive to be great and perfect."

To strive for perfection is a worthy endeavour, to assume that I or anyone else has achieved it, is naive, limiting and possibly dangerous. I'd like to know who Yaron Brook's puts in this category of great and perfect. Ayn Rand, I suppose would be one.

unalone9• 18 years ago

I'd actually bet that most people who really believe in objectivism would NOT call Rand perfect, because she most certainly was not. She was flawed both in writing and in character. It's just that she happened to do a much better job with both than most other people do, and she created a set of principles that are greater than she was.

"Just plain scary?" A lot of people exaggerate like that. And what's the downside in thinking that people are capable of being perfect? What sort of a situation would have that leading to a downfall?

jonny_noog7• 18 years ago

Call it exaggeration if you like, but actually I firmly believe exactly this. People are not capable of achieving perfection. Perfection is by definition not achievable.

What are the downsides? Well without writing a thesis on the subject, basically what I have already mentioned. If one believes ones self to be perfect, then logically, there is no reason to continue to strive for improvement is there? Again by definition, you can't improve on perfection.

If one believes ones self to be perfect, then ones opinions/decisions/actions must also be perfect (i.e., perfectly correct) and therefore beyond doubt or compromise. I see such an absolute and unquestionable position (particularly if that position is held by a person in any kind of leadership role) having the possibility to lead to all sorts of unfortunate social consequences. History is filled with examples of leaders who believed their point of view to be beyond question or compromise, usually with bad results.

So if it's not Ayn Rand, who's perfect then?

I stand by my original comment.

No Gods or Kings: Objectivism and Ayn Rand in BioShock

Related Stories