![]() Again, Bioshock Infinite differs from the first two Bioshocks, but just as the original Bioshock was built around a critique of Randian objectivism, this one strongly captures the specific kind of American exceptionalism that drove the United States at the end of the Gilded Age. To be sure, a big part of the lived-in feeling also comes from the game’s ideological underpinnings. Despite being fantastical, the world of Columbia nonetheless feels lived-in, and that stems from the way it builds on American architecture circa the late 1800s/early 1900s. Much like the first two games were given a distinctive character by their Art Deco environments, Bioshock Infinite feels like it’s of a specific time and place thanks to its reliance on the Beaux_Arts movement. Of course, it helps that Bioshock Infinite is driven by such a strong artistic vision. There’s less opportunity to hide weaknesses behind dark corners here - yet, remarkably, the game still looks stunning. Bioshock Infinite, by contrast, takes place mostly outdoors, in the bright, shiny, floating city of Columbia. ![]() While the first two Bioshocks looked fantastic and ran fairly well on the Switch, they also had the advantage of taking place in the dark, underwater city of Rapture. ![]() ![]() The latter, actually, is a bit of a surprise. Not-too-surprisingly, Bioshock Infinite succeeds on both counts: it’s every bit as good as I remember, and it runs perfectly well too. Admittedly, seven years is a long time, so I was as curious to see whether the game lived up to my memories as I was to see how it performed on the Switch. Whereas I’d barely played the first Bioshock before its arrival on the Switch, and the second one not at all, I have fond memories of playing Bioshock Infinite way back when it first came out on the PS3 in 2013. Unlike the other two games in the Bioshock trilogy, I went into Bioshock Infinite with a pretty good idea of what to expect.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |