Portal, Bioshock and a very, very long book.

I meant to post this a few weeks ago, but I figured since I took the time to write it, I might as well post it.


I just finished Portal, or rather I got to the end, got frustrated at the final ‘orb’, went to bed and the next day my wife finished her game from the middle on, which pretty much eliminates the need for me to finish my game.

What a great game. People have been complaining that it’s too short, but I think that’s the beauty of it. There are so many ‘sandbox games out there that it’s nice to be able to sit down to a nice linear, goal oriented game and puzzle through some obstacles. The payoff was worth it too. While I don’t think you can compare the depth and richness of the Randian undertones of Bioshock (by far my favorite game premise to date), the paranoia induced by GLaDOS’s ramblings was fantastic. All of that topped off with ‘Still Alive’. I am firm believer that if something can be done; it’s being done right now in some secret lab to people that didn’t exactly ‘volunteer’.

And speaking of Bioshock, I am surprised that it took this long for a game based on Objectivism to be created. Atlas Shrugged, as unbelievably ponderous and nigh unreadable as it was, did paint a picture of heroic archetypes; men that created the engines of the world and where honor bound by there own ethics, not to live of the lives of others. John Galt, Harry Reardon and Dagny Taggart were brilliant captains of industry, who worshipped progress, honored logic and hard work and absolutely despised sloth and unearned merit.

Don’t most players follow the tenets of rational self-interest when dealing with their surroundings in a game, even when they don’t realize it? Are most in-game heroes industrious, hard-nosed and determined everymen, from Link and Mario to Lara Croft and Master Chief? And don’t most games hinge on the premise that the heroes are honorable, that they will not use their gifts take advantage of those without them? This is where the fantasy of Objectivism and video game heroism are most similar; the assumption that people are good. Consider Superman. If he were to really exist, I don’t think it would be too long before he used his power to subjugate the Earth, and in all likely hood, destroy it. People suck, and in her heart, Ayn probably knew it. As cool as it was to have him fix the machine they were trying to kill him with, I sincerely doubt John Galt would have been saying anything out than “For the love of God, please stop electrocuting my balls!” as they tortured him.

I do find it ironic that the ‘Good’ ending of the game is only obtained through Altruism. Not being an Objectivist, it’s the ending I chose. What Would John Galt Do? Of course it’s unfair to allude that rational self interest extends to murdering little girls to further your own ends. In fact it’s exactly what Andrew Ryan was speaking against; parasites and slave masters living off the work, sweat and blood of others. That is Atlas/Fontaine in a nutshell.

What we need is more games of this caliber, games that are well written and provide provocative food for thought. I hear that there’s a prequel possibly in the works for Bioshock and with the release of The Orange Box, one can only hope that Valve is planning even more content of the level of Half-Life 2.