BioShock Infinite “Truth From Legend” trailer is quite creepy

Monday, 28th January 2013 13:18 GMT By Dave Cook

BioShock Infinite has received an eerie new trailer from Irrational Games. It’s fashioned like an old school educational documentary. It discusses the city of Columbia’s history in detail, and the reasons for its succession from America.

Creepy no? What’s with all the 1980s references? We haven’t forgotten the weird 1980s time skip in one of Irrational’s earliest gameplay demos at E3 2011. Remember? The one where you can see Return of the Jedi – then ‘Revenge of the Jedi’ – plastered on a cinema marquee?

Is the game actually set in the early 1900s? Is there a hidden twist we’re not seeing yet? Share your theories below.



  1. YoungZer0

    Hm, maybe Elizabeth’s powers grew stronger or out of her control and she teleported Columbia through time and space, or something like that.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. viralshag

    Don’t know why but I have no interest in this game. Loved BioShock from what I remember but I never even played 2.

    I think that “moment” in BS was so good I didn’t think the franchise could top it, so I actively stay away.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. absolutezero

    Yet the best part of Bioshock 1 was Fort Frolic and Bioshock 2 had a more personal grounded inside view of Rapture as opposed to the outsider who happens to turn into Underwater Jesus.

    Its like staying away from Action games because Resident Evil 4 exists.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. YoungZer0

    @2: I’m not as hyped about the game as the rest of the world seems to be, but i’ll definitely check it out. Not a fan of the Disney-Gone-Bad-Artstyle, but the gameplay seems to be solid enough and the story should be interesting.

    Which is exactly why i never gotten to that “moment” in the first Bioshock. A friend of mine spoiled the ending for me and somehow the game lost all appeal, as it only seems to be build on that moment alone. The gameplay wasn’t good and there barely was any character interaction. I mean most of the time you listen to people talking.

    Not what i would describe as good storytelling.

    So i stopped playing it midway through.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. absolutezero

    The original Bioshock was an almost direct update of most of the important parts of System Shock 2. Thats where the audio-logs come from, the isolation from other humans, the fact that the enemies can and will plead, scream and talk while trying to kill you. Plasmids, weapon mods etc etc.

    It may seem slightly archaic now but I would still keep the first Bioshock exactly as it is rather than trying to add in cut-scenes, or human NPC characters. Actually alot of the history and sad story of Bioshock is revealed through exploration and play, Arcadia for example. Actually there are tonnes of areas all the way through that reveal snapshots of Rapture at various stages of its downfall.

    Bolt holes with mattresses and food storage, a dessicated corpse which while it was still alive had covered the room in a criss cross of wire traps in order to protect itself. It says alot that the one point the game takes control out of your hands in order to make you watch something its directly tied into the story. That is good storytelling.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. YoungZer0

    @5: Cutscenes? Who said anything about cutscenes?

    Hm, now that you mention it at least cutscenes can be skipped. I hated having to watch those scripted events unfold again and again and again. Boring and tedious.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. polygem

    great, atmospheric and very clever trailer. loving it.

    first bioshock is definitley in my top 20 game list this gen. bishock 2 not even in my top 100…

    #7 2 years ago
  8. viralshag

    I never played any of the System Shock games, so I can’t comment in regard to those.

    @4, To be honest, looking back and thinking that *SPOILER* made the game great to me, everything before that could have been playable at best for all I know now. I never went back to replay it.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. absolutezero

    There are very few scripted events that you “need” to sit and watch, its possible to just trudle off and continue doing something else. Those that are there are well folded into the story though and feel of advancement so they don’t bother me that much.

    Try starting Half Life 2 again to know actual painful unskippable scripted sequences. At least it all falls away once the game gets going but the start of HL2 is still difficult to battle through, jumping on desks and throwing books and all.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. YoungZer0

    @8: Yeah, i gave the game twice a chance to win me over. It never succeeded.

    @9: I remember one in particular, the first appearance of the Big Daddy. That must have been 3-5 minutes of waiting.

    And yes, the unskippable sequences in Half-Life 2 were horrendous and still are and i never finished it.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. absolutezero

    Shame, the emergent gameplay possibilities offered up towards the end of Half Life 2 are still some of the best examples ever created.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. DSB

    I wish more games could be like Bioshock.

    It’s definitely true that the gameplay was lacking, and it did get a free pass on that from pretty much everyone, but it also did an amazing job of telling you about a location through the environment.

    It’s not like it’s amazing art, but something that basic is still rare enough in videogames to be precious.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. YoungZer0

    @11: Maybe i’ll go back, probably around the same time they release Half-Life 3.

    @12: But didn’t Fallout 3 and NV have all those moments where it would tell a story on environments alone?

    #13 2 years ago
  14. DSB

    @13 I don’t remember much from Fallout 3, but New Vegas did a pretty good job of it.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. absolutezero

    The newer Fallout titles were done on such a large scale that asset reuse really hurt what they tried to do with segments of passive story-telling.

    I still love the Dunwich building though, I wish more parts of New Vegas were like that. Alot of NV was really just tiresome moral grey area trudge work.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. YoungZer0

    @14: Yep, that is pretty much my opinion too. Although Fallout 3 seemed bigger, Fallout NV had more ‘special’ locations, every building i entered had a story to tell. The buildings were smaller, but much more focused. Fallout 3 felt like dirt in comparison. As if civilization never bothered cleaning up after the bombs. Everything was just huge with nothing in it but trash.

    I think Bethesda did a much better job with Skyrim.

    @15: I think that’s a fair point, but most of the time it still worked surprisingly well.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. PC_PlayBoy

    Day 1 on PC (obviously). The console versions are fucking gimped…

    #17 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.