DENVER, 6:44 AM, SAT MAY 17 | 48 POSTS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS | tips@kotaku.com | SUBMIT A TIP | RSS
AU

No Gods or Kings: Objectivism in BioShock

By: Brian Crecente

The sunken city of Rapture, a world of art deco aesthetics, neon sales pitches and looming architecture, is home to more than just murderous splicers and lumbering Big Daddys, it's also a surprising breeding ground for introspection.

BioShock may have been conceived as a study in nuance, a place for gamers to discover and explore at their own pace, but its dip into the ethical morass of Ayn Rand's objectivist philosophies has brought her beliefs back into the mainstream spotlight and even piqued the interest of the Ayn Rand Institute's president, Yaron Brook.

Brook, a former member of the Israeli Army military intelligence and award-winning finance professor at Santa Clara University, first took notice of the game when he discovered his 18-year-old son playing it. It's a fact that didn't bother Brook despite his son's objectivist beliefs and the game's not so positive take on the philosophy.

"My son has to find his own way in life," he said. "There are certain games I wouldn't want him to play, like Grand Theft Auto, games that celebrate criminality. But a game that might lead him to think and have him challenge his ideas, I'm fine with.

"Luckily for me he doesn't agree with the game, he still seems to believe in objectivism"

Objectivism as a central theme in BioShock was actually the result of a confluence of ideas and happenstance. The heart of the game started, as do most of Ken Levine's games, as the answer to a problem.

"How do we make an environment that feels really complete?" Levine said. "That's where we came up with a space ship for System Shock. In BioShock we said what can we do similarly and simulate fully as we could a space ship."

The answer was an underwater city, but that simply formed the game's outline, the walls that kept a player from remembering they were in a confined space.

Levine wondered what sorts of people might live in an underwater city, what would drive someone from the rest of the world.

"I started thinking about utopian civilizations," he said. "You have these traditional utopian notions. I've always been a fan of utopian and dystopian literature.

"The more I started thinking about making a compelling place and compelling villain, someone who had a real concrete set of beliefs made sense."

Enter Objectivism. Levine said he had been reading Ayn Rand's books over the past few years and was fascinated with her "intensity and purity of belief."

"The surety she has in her beliefs was fascinating," he said. "She almost spoke like a super villain, like Dr Doom."
And her characters, Levine believed, projected that same intensity.

"I started to wonder, what happens when you stop questioning yourself? It becomes a set of accepted truths, instead of something you're constantly using in the lab of reality."

FLAWS IN LOGIC AND CHARACTER
Where Rand had Fountainhead's Howard Roark and Atlas Shrugged's John Galt, Levine had Andrew Ryan, Rapture's founder.

Levine said he views the game's chief protagonist as a cross between Howard Hughes and "one of Rand's characters if he were put in the real world with all of the real problems people have."

"Rand's characters are super heroes," he said. "Great people without flaws. "

But Brook says, that's not really a fair interpretation of Rand's beliefs.

"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.

"In many cases that true. But I think what lessens the game is that misinterpretation of objectivism."

Rand's characters aren't flawed because not everyone is, Brook says.

"I think its flawed logic in the sense that he thinks that people have to be flawed," he said. "I think in many respects (Rand's) books do put her characters in real life.

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

That's how Levine's Ryan starts out, a "new man", an incredible individual, but in the end he fails and falls.

Ryan fails, Levine says, because while building the utopia of Rapture he never questions himself, never stopped to think if he had gone astray. And because of that he betrays his own belief system and ends up "wanting his cake and eating it too."

Despite his failings, Ryan still remains true to his ideals in the end, an important point.

"He brought his end upon himself and didn't shirk away from it," Levine said. "He wasn't a hypocrite. He may have failed, but he really believed what he did and put everything on the line for it."

THE GLUE THAT HOLDS THE GAME TOGETHER
Levine was careful how he presented to his team the idea of injecting philosophy into what was meant to be a mainstream game.

"The game doesn't lead with objectivism," he said. "I didn't pitch it to the team that way. If you pitch it that way to the team you're going to get the wrong game."

So initially, the team concentrated on capturing a time period. They studied furniture from the pre and post-war period. Levine went out and took pictures of New York architecture. They brought in Jack Beatty, senior editor of The Atlantic Monthly, to talk about the time period. Levine also brought in a few copies of Rand's books.

"There was a bit of an education process," he said. "The artists mostly had to think about the art deco stuff, I wrote about 95 percent of the dialog."

Late in the development process Levine decided that the game and the underwater city of Rapture needed more propaganda, things like the larger-than-life bust of Andrew Ryan and its slogan: No Gods or Kings. Only Man and the constant barrage of public service announcements.

"I felt the philosophy wasn't coming across enough, " Levine said. And objectivism "was the glue that holds the aesthetics together."

A CAUTIONARY TALE
Levine says he didn't set out to torpedo objectivism with BioShock.

"I think I'm more sympathetic to it," he said. "I find a lot of positive in it. I find her notion of selfishness is very interesting, not living for the abrogation of others, believing in the individual man as the central powerful force in the world rather than a government or a supreme being, the reintegration in belief of man/woman.

"We live in a country where atheists are distrusted, but you can be proudly religious and proudly political, but to reject those things and be proud of it I think that's a very brave woman.

"But I'm not a person who buys anything hook, line and sinker. I view life more as a buffet style.
"When I look at anything in my life one of my saving graces is the ability to step back and examine things. It's very easy to get mired in ideology."

Levine said he actually wrote the story of BioShock as a fan of Ayn Rand's precepts.

"I'm probably way more similar to her in my terms of how I think about religion and politics than any other philosophers," he said.

But Levine believes that Rand would reject that take on philosophy, that Rand believed it was "her way or the highway."

So BioShock wasn't meant really to be a game about Rand's beliefs, but more about her intensity.

"I wasn't setting out to make a game about objectivism, I was setting out to make a game about someone who had a very strong belief in a philosophy that was similar to this philosophy.

"It's a cautionary tale about wholesale, unquestioning belief in something."

While Brook cautions he hasn't played the game, his take on what Levine was trying to do with the story and its use of philosophy is surprisingly similar to what Levine himself says.

"My general sense is that the game's author is suspicious of any absolute philosophy and clumps objectivism in there," Brook said. "While he sees certain virtues in it, he thinks anything taken too far ultimately leads to disaster."

GUNS, EXPLOSIONS AND PHILOSOPHY
"Some people just like to blow shit up and some people like to think about the themes and the metaphors," he said.

And there were plenty of both in BioShock. Take for instance the disturbingly symbiotic relationship between the Little Sisters and the Big Daddys.

"The more you know about objectivism the more interesting the little sisters become," Levine said. "The little sisters are an examination of the question: Do the means justify the ends"

The weapon dispensers found throughout the game are meant to be another metaphor.

Rand, Levine says, is a believer in a completely free and unfettered market. Rapture and its vending machines were intended to be an illustration of what can happen when intellectual examination of a philosophy or a way of life stops.

"Some people complained about the vending machines and guns and ammunitions in the world, but there would be no restrictions on the market at all, so I could see that happening, especially if there was a civil war on."

Levine understands that not everyone wants to have a thoughtful experience when they play games, but he believes strongly in providing one for the people who do.

"I think by trying to throw some reflection on it you make people step back from the games they've played and think about it a tiny, tiny bit," he said. "But it has to be an entertaining experience first.

"The game was never intended to be a screed against Rand because I think there is a lot to like there, but if you take anything to its extremes it isn't good.

While in the end, Brook doesn't agree with what he believes to be the anti-objectivism tone of the game, he still sees it as a good think for the Ayn Rand Institute and objectivism.

"There have been a lot of people writing about the game and its connection to Ayn Rand," he said. And that's a good thing "in a sense, if you believe that any publicity is good publicity because it creates a level of curiosity and sends people to read the books. We probably had more kids going to read the book because of the video game.

"I think there is a certain benefit. Ultimately it doesn't portray objectivism well, but the mainstreaming of objectivism is important too. And it's important to see the willingness to debate those ideas even in a video game."

VIDEO GAMES: THE NEW LITERATURE
When BioShock hit, it was met with both high game review scores and a level of intellectual fascination that surprised even Levine.

"We joke that everyone should have known that a game about a pseudo-objectivist dystopia would be a huge hit," he said. "My initial goal for BioShock was to create an environment that people could buy into and to have a level of detail that you just don't see in games now. We have an opportunity to have players pull content out of the game rather than to push it at them."

But in wrapping their world around questions of morality and philosophy, Levine and his team managed to do something else, they managed to spark in some players the desire to, like Levine, step back from their beliefs, their ideologies and study them from afar.

"I like that people walk away with different interpretations," he said. "We weren't creating a polemic, we were creating a piece of art that has different meanings to different people.

"We were trying to ask questions more than answer them."

While the game can certainly be viewed as an attack on objectivism, despite Levine's intent, Brook says he really doesn't have a problem with it, or with the idea of the medium of video games taking on the challenge of dealing with an issue as complex as Rand's philosophy.

"I don't see a problem with the medium," he said. "I think it is potentially a very exciting medium with which to introduce people to ideas. I think video games replaces much of literature's impact. The literature today is dull and boring and video games allow kids to experience the heroism that the books don't provide them.

"Who knows where the medium is going I think that's one of the exciting things about video games and technology. I think it will be interesting to see what kind of issues they take on."

Feature

3:16 PM on Fri Feb 15 2008
66,538 views
236 comments

Comments

  • "She's getting existential again."
    "It's okay, I have a super soaker."
    So, games can question your beliefs and make you think hard about things...life used to be so simple, all we had to do was eat the dots and avoid the ghosts....

  • Image of Witzbold Witzbold at 03:26 PM on 02/15/08 *

    That was a great thought inducing piece Crecente. Good read indeed!

  • Way to much use of "objective" in that article!

  • Great read none the less.

  • What a great read. I wish more games were philisophical just as BioShock is. One of the best experiences I've had in a game especially coming off reading Atlas Shrugged over the summer.

  • Wow. This is really interesting. One of the reasons I got sucked into BioShock was because it was a very rare game that force me to think. Sure the whole moral choice issue was overhyped, but chuck that aside. The entire examination of objectivism, the magnetism of the characters, the symbolism in everyone from Ryan to Fontaine, kept me interested in it well past the end of my first playthrough.

    It is a rare game that does it, and its the key reason why BioShock became one of my favorite games of all time.

    Thanks for the feature.

  • Amazing read, thanks!

  • Finally video games can be recognized as another medium to express ideas.

  • Hell yes. I'm as objectivist as they come and thought the same thing when I played the game. I found all sorts of flaws in Andrew Ryan's logic. I love games that make people think(if only a little). I think every gamer should pick it up.

  • great article. would like to see more in this vein. would like to see more GAMES in this vein, too.

  • I agree with Levine in the sense that humanity cannot survive in an absolute ideology. We'd all crumble at the status quo. I think a lot of what drives people in life is simply the fact that they don't agree with what they see coupled with an endless variety. Just as in games, where one would get bored with repetitive sequences (Halo's Library, for example... bastards), life would be equally stale if all of our lives played out like the television says it should.

    Discovery is a huge part of everyone's life, even the ones who have it rough. If every day was the same, there'd be no reason to keep going because you'd be absolutely sure of what's around the corner. The presence of probability makes things interesting. Feel free to disagree.

  • John Galt was morally flawless in his intentions, but he did partially sacrifice his ideals for his love towards the end of Atlas Shrugged, so i disagree about her expecting people to be perfect. The main character, Dagny Taggart, fought against Galt's ideals to maintain the honor and property of her family. Rand's characters weren't really "perfect", so the Objectivist school of thought isn't fundamentally flawed.

  • TL; DR!!1

    No, just kidding, great read. I'm writing a paper here and I know how much effort went into this. Quite interesting, dugg. ;)

  • BioShock's critique of Objectivism boils down to "Greed = Bad," an argument that I could get from any socialistic forum troll on any internet forum. They didn't offer any real arguments, lacking in any sort of relevant depth that made System Shock so great. Sure, it was an excellently put together game that was enjoyable, but don't make it into an amazing break-down of Randian philosophy, because it's not.

  • Great read. I wish you guys did more of this stuff.

  • Image of Toasticus Toasticus at 03:36 PM on 02/15/08 *

    Fascinating article. I loved the moments in the game that made me loosen my grip on the controller a moment and just go, "Huh." I really enjoyed the philosophical implications of things, and I love that it was a game that dared to be more than just entertainment. It's not fine art, it's not a staggering work of absolute genius, but it's damn sure a step in the right direction. I eagerly await news of Levine & Co's next project.

  • Woof....that's a lotta big words.

    I've read Ayn Rand, and I've played through Bioshock...and I don't consider the game to be an attack on Rand's philosophy. Really, any type of government ideal could have been used to the same result: this is what happens when things go horribly wrong.

  • Wow, great piece!

  • I live in a country where Atheism thrives (will not disclose), and despite the country's status as a developed nation, this country's lack of religion is partly what sets the people of this nation culturally inferior to other nationals in Europe or even the US.

  • Image of Toasticus Toasticus at 03:37 PM on 02/15/08 *

    @1gunners4: I humbly suggest that you actually read the article.

  • Great Read! I really enjoyed it. Unfourtunatley the game it self can't hold my attention as well as this article did. I have tried playing it a dozen times and can't stay involved in it.

  • So, Crecente, I hate you a little bit, mainly because I've been meaning to write a piece investigating the correlations between objectivism and Bioshock for something like 7 months. By which I mean, this turned out really well. Discussing this very topic was part of my thesis to graduate from college last June.

  • Good stuff. Thanks Brian.

  • The GTA 3 games also come form a place of objectivity, not so much as a little hateful conscience that telling you to burn things like so many parents believe. Actually it's a lot more along the lines of existentialism, which dives into the spirit of modern video games. It's a "what if," as it has always been, and what was the music you were listening to at the time you did it? What ever your personal achievement/goal was.

    2007 was a fantastic year for video games, the thing here, is once "casual" games over-run the market, games that "challenge" thought like Bio Shock, and the GTA series will disapear, and all the things parents fought for will devolve into what popular comics and T.V. are today, and don't tell me todays' comics are great today. The X-men are now a bunch of "Astonishing" duche bags in actual leather and spandex... I can't hang, also I can't wait for the "reality video game." There's nothing wrong with our form of entertainment. The problem lies with these so-called watch dogs.

    They can't stand it when you think. It makes them insane... (they can feel you thinking, it's painful to them...)

  • Rand's characters aren't flawed because not everyone is, Brook says.

    That's quite a boast...

  • @1gunners4: Yeah, i think it's a pretty in-depth argument. You might want to read the WHOLE article, not just the title.

  • Interesting article, I'm kinda surprised with how Brook replied to a lot of the issues on Bioshock, but in a very good way.

    Also, the guy with the xkcd reference at the top there: good job.

  • wow, this is a great article!

  • I made a longass post about this in a comment section a few days ago, but I really do think that Bioshock sets a new standard in immersive video game narrative that I really hope other games try to imitate. I think that gaming has so much potential as an artistic medium that very few developers take advantage of because it's so much riskier to make an intellectually challenging game rather than another pretty multiplayer FPS. I applaud 2K for taking that chance, and I'm really happy for both them and Levine that it turned out to be a hit. I'm just a little concerned (especially with the line in this story that says Levine himself wrote 95 percent of the dialogue, which I thought was universally excellent) that the upcoming sequel (or prequel or whatever the hell it is) will pale in comparison to the original because Levine won't be there to add his creative spark.

  • Smart man, he got what videogames are geared to accomplish.

    Can't really agree with his views on extremes and objectivism though, but good stuff non the less.

    Groovay article.

  • @Toasticus: Agreed, Ken Levine can probably sell me just about anything after Bioshock.

  • I haven't played the game (don't like shooters and couldn't even get the demo to run on my computer), but I've read the detailed plot analysis. So I have some idea what's in it. It does seem to be a serious thought experiment about what could go wrong in an ideal society. People (like 1gunners4) who think it's not serious, I think, fall into the "It would have worked perfectly, if only you'd done everything I said!" camp. Like a lot of communists, fascists, even capitalists, whose perfect systems fail.

    Which is hardly different from the "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you darn kids!" philosophy.

    I used to be a libertarian, in college, and it was a long transition from me, through the Libertarian party, flirting with Socialist parties, settling in the Green party, and finally realizing that no matter how pure my ideals, I'd still have to work within a flawed system. Thinking that nothing's good enough unless it's perfect is a recipe for both totalitarianism and disaster.

    I could never take Objectivism seriously, though. In college I wrote an article for the student newspaper on the problems with identity politics, and a couple days later, the faculty adviser for the Objectivist club tracked me down and left a message on my answering machine, asking me to join. It was really creepy, and it was my first introduction to the Rand cult. I've still never read her books, and I think I'm better off for it. She and her followers are scary people.

  • Great post. I would love to see more of these kinds of games AND posts in the future.

  • @1gunners4: The real nuts and bolts of philosophy seem difficult to apply to game form.
    Beyond the sphere of civic/applied ethical philosophy, the theories that have dominated philosophy over the last few hundred years are quite obscure.

    For instance, I can't imagine a video game being able to explain Kant's idea of the noumenon.

  • Objectivism, like any "ism" is horseshit.

  • Very good read, really focuses some of the ideas many gamers have on Bioshock.

  • @Sparkamus: How about Super Paper Mario? You're constantly dealing with the conflict between a 2D "that which is thought" and the 3D "thing-in-itself." I thought it was pretty deep.

  • Thanks Crecente. Your features are always great to read and enlightening. If we could get more journalists to approach writing about games the way you do in your features, I think we'd have a lot more people realize and appreciate the good things that games can offer.

  • @Eville1:
    Skepticism? Empricism?

  • Image of Antiterra Antiterra at 03:59 PM on 02/15/08 *

    This here is why Kotaku is such a great place (well, this and The-Tag-formerly-known-as-Hot-Tears-Of-Shame).

    Andrew Ryan may have eventually failed because he never stopped to question himself, but could he have risen so high if he had indeed questioned himself?
    Would there have been Rapture without one man's unshakable faith in his own beliefs and his quasi-messianic stature (it's quite ironic that most anti-religious leaders end up seeing themselves as living gods) ?

    One thing I loved was that the opening "Welcome to Rapture" speech had Ryan chastising the Vatican, Washington and Moscow... yet Ryan himself is like a prophet, an autocratic government and Stalin all rolled into one neat megalomaniac.

    I have goosebumps when I think of how much more I would have loved a game set in the same world, but that wasn't an FPS. The shooter aspect ended up drowning everything else and systematically broke the spell/mood/sense of fascination. (IMHO, of course...)




  • Great read, Brian. God, I have to play through BioShock again now. =)

  • I really enjoyed that piece, Crecente. Thanks a lot.