I have to agree in part about the victimization complex, but I wouldn't say that the idea that controversy would be exploited to garner attention entails one belief or the other.
When I see these arguments I'm always so tempted to link to the "science b****" scene from It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia because that is one of the funniest takes I've seen on this debate. Then I remember that people have no sense of humor when it comes to this stuff.
I don't know if I would call it a marketing gimmick, I would say that it's marketing a facet of the game for which it is somewhat known. If the whole story was made up, THEN it would be a cheap gimmick, but nobody is in any position to claim that.
This, plus everyone wins 'cause the character ends up more believable and interesting. More power to both Levine and the employee for handling it like men.
Am I the only one a little concerned that Ken Levine had proceeded so far into development without having a good grasp of his main villain's background, or the 'key' to his character? Then again, what the hell do I know about game development?
But why are so many people assuming that the employee was just some narrow-minded easily offended whiner? Have you seen whatever it was he saw? What if Comstock was a ridiculously caricatured villain to the point where it was practically a personal insult towards him? I shudder to think that we should all be of the mentality that we just bend over and take anything anyone says about out beliefs without any protest just because they have the right to say it as artists (or are our boss).
@nurnberg I swear some people just have to make everything about "liberals" and "conservatives". You know politics is actually a lot more complicated than that, don't you? Anyway, if past Bioshock games are any indication, the message will be more along the lines that any such ideal is bad if taken far enough. Bioshock 2, for example, was the counter-point to Bioshock 1, which you might consider the more "liberal" leaning game.
Needarepair's comments