Bioshock Infinite - the $200 million 6 hour literally on rails interactive movie with guns thread

[Diablo169]

BioShock isn't art.

Dunno it's shit enough to be called art.

 

[ghostdog]

So the only redeeming aspect of the Bioshock franchise, the visuals (even they don't make any fucking sense), are a rip-off ?

Ken Levine should go fuck himself, only the fact that he tried to sell the shitty "1998 mode" in Bioshock infinite as a love letter to System Shock 2, shows that he is a fraud and a retard and doesn't have a clue about what made SS2 a great game. It certainly wasn't his narrative design with the heavy handed audio-logs or the story twist that was obvious since the start of the game, but the level design, the tense atmosphere and the brilliantly integrated RPG mechanics in an FPS game, things he probably didn't have anything to do with. Unfortunately when making his System Shock spiritual successor (I vomited a bit in my mouth) he only carried over the worst aspects of the game.

 

[Metro]

Why do people keep talking about this shit?

 

[Baron Dupek]

Dunno it's shit enough to be called modern art.

fixed

His answer? Kinda shady

 

[Blaine]

Yeah, he ripped it off. The chances of that being a coincidence are remote, and he's denied the cover art as an "inspiration."

When I'm feeling creative, I strive to imagine ideas that are as original as possible, reviewing a mental catalogue of what's been done before as I cogitate. I attempt to find the chinks and cracks in existing art, literature, film, etc., not simply to be unique but because I want to know, solely for my own satisfaction, that what I've created is my own. (It's still not truly going to be my own, of course. It'll be a collage of memory snippets and concepts gathered throughout my lifetime from external sources.)

Apparently, though, I've been doing it wrong and should be blatantly plundering my "creative" "ideas" from the past.

 

[Jick Magger]

There's nothing wrong with taking ideas from past works and interpreting them in your own way, but the key point here is that you acknowledge where you got your ideas when you finally display the final product. Any teacher in the arts will tell you that not doing this is dishonesty at best and plagiarism at worst.

 

[Angthoron]

So bros, what's that story about?

 

[aris]

Wow! An old poster that kind of looks like an image from bioshock? MUCH SCANDAL. *Gasp* is this really the best you can do?

 

[Blaine]

There's nothing wrong with taking ideas from past works and interpreting them in your own way, but the key point here is that you acknowledge where you got your ideas when you finally display the final product. Any teacher in the arts will tell you that not doing this is dishonesty at best and plagiarism at worst.

The concept of a man in an old-fashioned diving suit paired with a nine-year-old girl with black hair wearing a pretty dress is a little too specific to copy in such a direct fashion without venturing into plagiarism. There was no reinterpretation of the cover art; it was copied wholesale. It wasn't photocopied, but that's irrelevant.

That's why he had to publicly deny the cover art as an inspiration—it's too intact for anyone to accept it as inspiration rather than plagiarism.

Wow! An old poster that kind of looks like an image from bioshock? MUCH SCANDAL. *Gasp* is this really the best you can do?

"Kind of" looks like? You're an idiot.

 

[Jasede]

It's just some guy in a diver's suit and a girl. In Japanese art there's always a little girl next to things so once you are done looking at the rest you can masturbate.

It's pretty unlikely for anyone to know this weird Japanese magazine.

Even if it was taken as inspiration it doesn't really matter. That's 99% of art if you didn't realize. When artists try to be more creative than that you get 'modern art', and we all know what that looks like.

Denial doesn't imply guilt, not that there's any need to feel guilty in the first place. Have you any idea about things? This is like everything ever; everything is a variation on something that exists. Very little is purely original.

Also I ought remind you that it happens very often, in art as well as science, that two different people that have never met come up with the exact (or similar) thing independently. There's a lot of examples for this.


There are 1000000 things wrong with Bioshock but this 'issue' is so small, it doesn't even make the list.

 

[Zewp]

Kotaku and clickbait, folks. Kotaku and clickbait.

 

[Athelas]

It would also explain why the whole Big Daddy/Little Sister thing is so nonsensical: they just went with it because it looked cool on some Japanese cover, not because it served some narrative purpose or anything.

 

[DeepOcean]

Nah, the worse crime of Bioshock is not being a good game, if he made a game with : great level design, with a really unsettling and oppressive mood where you feel insecure and overwhelmed, interesting loot to interact with enviroment in interesting ways... he could copy any shit he wanted and I wouldn't care. Basicaly if Lavine had actually delivered all the lies he said, copying an obscure japanese magazine would be the least of his crimes.

 

[Blaine]

Also I ought remind you that it happens very often, in art as well as science, that two different people that have never met come up with the exact (or similar) thing independently. There's a lot of examples for this.

Old-fashioned diving suits are rare oddities. It just seems too coincidental to me, regardless of BioShock's theme. Keep in mind too that the magazine cover and BioShock are both published professional works. The probability of a perfect repeat is therefore lower than it would be if everyone who ever drew anything were considered.

Take this, for example:

You won't find another just like it (angry/nightmare/etc. clown riding pink dinosaur) on Google using any keyword or image search (except for a few images from the same website; it's from some kind of "drawception" contest). It is the only picture of an angry clown riding a pink dinosaur you're likely to find anywhere. It is conceivably possible for another person to come up with it entirely on his or her own, of course (otherwise the first person to do so wouldn't have been able to), but the odds are very remote.

I find it much more likely he copied the cover than independently came up with almost the exact same thing in this case.

None of this matters, of course. It'll be ancient news everyone's forgotten about by the weekend.

 

[aris]

There's nothing wrong with taking ideas from past works and interpreting them in your own way, but the key point here is that you acknowledge where you got your ideas when you finally display the final product. Any teacher in the arts will tell you that not doing this is dishonesty at best and plagiarism at worst.

The concept of a man in an old-fashioned diving suit paired with a nine-year-old girl with black hair wearing a pretty dress is a little too specific to copy in such a direct fashion without venturing into plagiarism. There was no reinterpretation of the cover art; it was copied wholesale. It wasn't photocopied, but that's irrelevant.

That's why he had to publicly deny the cover art as an inspiration—it's too intact for anyone to accept it as inspiration rather than plagiarism.

Wow! An old poster that kind of looks like an image from bioshock? MUCH SCANDAL. *Gasp* is this really the best you can do?

"Kind of" looks like? You're an idiot.

There's nothing controversial about this at all, you retard. Even if the resemblance isn't coincidental, which it might very well be, there are thousands of other examples of this. See Starcraft and warhammer.

 

[Blaine]

There's nothing controversial about this at all, you retard.

Except for the controversy that brought it to our attention in the first place, you shit-for-brains duncemeister.

 

[buzz]

The scuba helmet dude was certainly something I fully expected to see in a setting involving an underwater city with early 20th century architecture. We might as well complain that Bioshock copied the concepts of submarines or radios.
The little girl concept in itself was highly unoriginal and cliche (ooh, the scary little girl, look at our mix of innocence and creepyness), pretty much a generic staple in Japanese horror or things inspired by them.
So the chance of it being a coincidence could be quite possible.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Coincidence? Maybe. But because the games were such shit, I'm inclined to believe that Ken Levine ripped it all off.
It's mostly out of spite, I admit it. But fuck that loser anyway.

 

[Gozma]

There's nothing controversial about this at all, you retard. Even if the resemblance isn't coincidental, which it might very well be, there are thousands of other examples of this. See Starcraft and warhammer.

I'm like 95% sure this is a coincidence but Blizzard heavily ripping off Warcraft from WFB and Starcraft from 40k is not even a question bro

 

[Night Goat]

BioShock isn't art.

Of course it is. Whether it's good art is debatable, but it doesn't need to be good to be art.

Coincidence? Maybe. But because the games were such shit, I'm inclined to believe that Ken Levine ripped it all off.
It's mostly out of spite, I admit it. But fuck that loser anyway.

Well, at least you admit it. I get the impression that Codexers' hate for anything popular Bioshock is causing them to make a bigger deal of this than it really is; if something they liked looked similar to an ancient Japanese magazine cover, I suspect they'd be a lot more lenient.

 

[Angthoron]

BioShock isn't art.

Of course it is. Whether it's good art is debatable, but it doesn't need to be good to be art.

By the virtue of what is it art, exactly?

 

[Job Creator]

Also I ought remind you that it happens very often, in art as well as science, that two different people that have never met come up with the exact (or similar) thing independently. There's a lot of examples for this.

Old-fashioned diving suits are rare oddities. It just seems too coincidental to me, regardless of BioShock's theme. Keep in mind too that the magazine cover and BioShock are both published professional works. The probability of a perfect repeat is therefore lower than it would be if everyone who ever drew anything were considered.

Take this, for example:

You won't find another just like it (angry/nightmare/etc. clown riding pink dinosaur) on Google using any keyword or image search (except for a few images from the same website; it's from some kind of "drawception" contest). It is the only picture of an angry clown riding a pink dinosaur you're likely to find anywhere. It is conceivably possible for another person to come up with it entirely on his or her own, of course (otherwise the first person to do so wouldn't have been able to), but the odds are very remote.

I find it much more likely he copied the cover than independently came up with almost the exact same thing in this case.

None of this matters, of course. It'll be ancient news everyone's forgotten about by the weekend.

 

[Night Goat]

By the virtue of what is it art, exactly?

I would define art as "anything that sentient beings create for reasons other than their own immediate survival." It is admittedly a very broad definition.

A more conventional definition of art:

2art
noun \ˈärt\
: something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings

: works created by artists : paintings, sculptures, etc., that are created to be beautiful or to express important ideas or feelings

: the methods and skills used for painting, sculpting, drawing, etc.

Bioshock would be covered by the first and possibly second definitions. You might not think that it is created with imagination and skill, is beautiful, or expresses important ideas or feelings, but some people do.

 

[Angthoron]

I see. That has to be the most nebulous M-W definition that I've seen in ages.

Still, a lot of actual art critics would disagree, and they would have solid grounds to base their disagreement upon; and if we were to take it that the imagery is indeed plagiarized, what it comes down to is a work that's neither imaginative nor expressive of important ideas or feelings (none of the BioShocks have these) - being left only with the collage of the beautiful and the skilful, in other words, the artisanly. Of course, as it's interpretative and as we are told we cannot treat art with complete objectivity, it just rolls off to "whatevs". It's rather amusing how art's definitions are rolling around, you could say it's the "What's an RPG?" question for the academia.

 

[Pantalones]

There's nothing controversial about this at all, you retard. Even if the resemblance isn't coincidental, which it might very well be, there are thousands of other examples of this. See Starcraft and warhammer.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/EA...-C-C-Tiberium-Alliances-Tank-Issue-41416.html

GameSpot originally did some legwork and pieced two-and-two together to find out that a tank design in Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances looked dead-on identical to a tank from Warhammer 40,000. Well, Games Workshop and EA have worked out the differences and there's no longer a reason to panic.

According to GameSpot, an EA representative actually did get back in touch with them regarding the issue and sprouted off the following explanation...

"Games Workshop and EA are aware of the IP issues around the artwork in question, which have now been resolved," .... "The artwork was internal EA concept art that was unintentionally released publicly. No Warhammer 40,000 tanks have ever made an appearance in Command and Conquer: Tiberium Alliances, and never will. Games Workshop and EA continue to have a strong relationship working together on Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning and the new free to play game Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes which just entered open beta."


So there you have it...EA was never in the wrong, it was just some internal artwork that leaked and somehow got out into the public promotional sphere and then all kinds of legal talk started churning up about how Games Workshop was going to sue EA into oblivion (although I actually think it's just jaded gamers who felt like this and wanted some justice handed out to the seemingly untouchable publishing giant). When in reality EA supposedly never had plans to use those designs in the game itself.

In the end, like all cases involving EA and some sort of nefarious scheme, their hands are now clean (for the time being) and they're absolved of the plagiarism charges. We'll just have to go back up into our sniper perches and look out for more stuff to pin on EA as it arrives, but they sure are good at finding PR cover.

Here's one of many games workshop lawsuits. If anything this is way more specific. Not only is the girl very similar but the girl plus diving suit combo eliminates any doubt this was the "inspiration". This is actually a much better case than the games workshop one. And much more serious theft because it was such a centerpiece for them.

Whoever made that art has a great case. Of course they could be dead by now since it's over 40 years old.