So, C3PX... I've had no one to discuss this with and so I'm going to force you (after the Rand'ian fashion) to discuss it with me.

*Ahoy! Thar be BioShock 1 SPOILERS ahead!* </salty sea pirate>

Did Objectivism fail Andrew Ryan/Rapture or did Andrew Ryan/Rapture fail Objectivism? Was Adam the X-Factor that Objectivism didn't and couldn't have accounted for which unraveled the whole sociopolitical theory? Or did Ryan not have the moral fibre to not get jealous of Fontaine and therefore become the godking that he hated so much?

Did Ryan not institute enough personal freedom (religion, contact with the surface, etc.) and that brought about rebellion? Or, in the context of the story, does Objectivism just not work? It seems to have worked wonderfully for a period of time (10 years) and then it fell apart. If you think it's the fault of the people, I find myself asking this: If the people of Rapture couldn't make Objectivism work, can anybody?

How did the game change your perspective on Objectivism? For myself, though the story might be a cautionary tale against objectivism and Ryan might have been the villain of the piece... I still find myself admiring Ryan and pining for a society like Rapture (pre civil war, pre Adam, of course)

*Mild BioShock 2 SPOILERS ahead*

And what do you make of the sequel where a cult of Altruists are the antithesis to Ryan's Objectivist distopia? Are the game makers/storytellers saying that Objectivism as an extreme is bad, but that Altruists (forced/compelled Altruism or Socialism) are even worse? If the 2nd game compares Altruism to Selfish Objectivism... what are the opposing philosophies of the first game? Is it just about failed objectivism, or is it about chaos vs objectivism?

Finally- I loved the Ryan Amusements Museum/Ride. I thought that was really well done.