I still disagree (Gaming)

by Jillybean, Thursday, August 15, 2013, 11:57 (4121 days ago) @ davidfuchs

Well - firstly, didn't Levine hang around Occupy camps for a while to get a feel for them?

But I don't think I've explained my problem very well. The article you linked to makes one good point -

When a revolution happens, yes sometimes the leaders become corrupt with power. That usually happens AFTER the power-grab is secure, not mid-victory. Also nothing Daisy Fitzroy does in the game, including shooting a crying kid, is as damaging to as many people as the day-to-day oppression perpetrated by Comstock’s society. I get that given the game’s setting, it’d be kind of boring to sit around and wait 10 years to see Fitzroy’s evolution into The Godfather or whatever (side note: WOULD PLAY), and it’s unfortunate that this game has no mechanics that allow for jumping forward in time…

We see so little of the revolution - particularly because we keep using plot devices to jump into a slightly different timeline - that Daisy's turn is meaningless. She goes from slave to revolutionary to leader to villain in the space of a few jumps. Where is her journey? We're given absolutely no reason for her corruption other than the tired old saying "power corrupts".

Of course, the rich, white antagonist gets lots of development - even before you learn he is also the protagonist.

My issue is that there is a story there, a story of someone falling from grace, and more than that it is a story that deserves to be told. But it's shoved aside for a strange and creepy family drama. I've already pointed out how uncomfortable I am with a lot of the Booker-Elizabeth interactions. The reason for that is the same reason I don't like the Daisy Fitzroy storyline. Both of those could be really interesting, but they're put through a Triple A game lens, where things are sexualised or dismissed as easily as you bury a sky hook in someone's skull.

Elizabeth and Booker are probably not supposed to be sexual towards each other. I'm sure the game never meant to imply that. But it does. It does because men are sexy and women are vulnerable and those are my expectations of a game. Infinite never tries to subvert that, or play on it or do anything other than say "oh and by the way she's also his daughter."

The revolution becomes a second-act villain like it would in any game, with no more reason than because the game says "Oh and by the way, power corrupts". Infinite never pays any due to the stories it try to tell - it has no respect for those emotional journeys. It's so busy making its vulnerable, busty leading lady shed a few tears and look attractive bruised that it doesn't want to tell us why Daisy might be corruptible at all.