|
GenHavoc posted:I can't speak to its dialectical purity or any such thing, but I admit to being suspicious of a thirty-page deconstruction of Bioshock Infinite which claims to analyze every detail in a holistic way but manages to mistake the song that accompanies Booker's entrance to Columbia as 'Amazing Grace'... Yeah, that one kinda jumped out at me too. I think he was doing this whole thing from memory, since there're a few minor details he gets wrong (like the coin flip coming up tails, when it actually comes up heads).
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
I think he played the game in a dimension where the coin came up tails. I mean, come on, Tim Rogers being in the wrong dimension answers so many questions, doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
AstroWhale posted:"Note that Many Worlds doesn't many anything" ...mean instead of many right? RickVoid posted:Maybe an Infinite number of Bookers convince an Infinite number of Elizabeths to not destroy an Infinite number of Siphons, preventing an Infinite number of Elizabeths from achieving Apotheosis, and then they go off to an Infinite number of Parises? Parees?) Is it still an empty quote if you quote yourself? Of course now that I've asked the question it doesn't matter, but I'd still like to know if I got banned/probated in the Infinite number of Alternate Earths where I didn't ask the question.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
To answer your posit about infinite Bookers convincing infinite Elizabeths not to destroy the siphon; yes that happened but they are irrelevant as they ceased to exist when Elizabeth aborted Comstock from space-time, thus erasing herself and everything to do with Columbia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
resurgam40 posted:
As you said there are many themes to this game, but I like the simplicity of this one. B.I. is a game about a man overcoming his own dark side with the help of his child. Double Rabite fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jul 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Double Rabite posted:As you said there are many themes to this game, but I like the simplicity of this one. B.I. is a game about a man overcoming his own dark side with the help of his child. He overcomes his dark side by basically killing himself? Eh... The thing that annoyed me in this game is that it was yet another game where the game ends with you, the player character, dying by no real fault of your own. It's become so commonplace in big games that it's practically cliche, but I am really REALLY tired of games just killing the main character to somehow give an ending more "impact" or whatever. Fallout 3 was derided for it too, but it keeps happening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
BottledBodhisvata posted:He overcomes his dark side by basically killing himself? Eh... The plot of the story starts when Booker sacrifices his child for the sake of his own benefit. It concludes when he sacrifices himself for the sake of his child. As muddled as that was demonstrated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Automatic Slim posted:The plot of the story starts when Booker sacrifices his child for the sake of his own benefit. It concludes when he sacrifices himself for the sake of his child. As muddled as that was demonstrated. Except his child also is erased from existence this way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Except his child also is erased from existence this way. Only "Elizabeth" was erased. "Anna" continues to exist, and assuming Booker doesn't sell her to someone else to settle his debts, she gets to live with her "real" father. Edit: Said much better below. RickVoid fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Jul 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Except his child also is erased from existence this way. If Comstock never exists then none of this does, meaning Anna(Elizabeth) goes on to live a normal life with a drunk irresponsible father rather than living a sheltered life with an irresponsible father drunk on power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
RickVoid posted:Only "Elizabeth" was erased. "Anna" continues to exist, and assuming Booker doesn't sell her to someone else to settle his debts, she gets to live with her "real" father. This makes no sense though. In fact, Booker still existing after the end doesn't make sense, and when he becomes Comstock he doesn't have an Anna. Like how does she exist? Why doesn't Elizabeth get erased too? We know she doesn't if the DLC is considered canon, since she's still running around murdering Comstocks for some stupid reason. If we're saying that she's only killing all iterations of Booker becoming Comstock (the one who refuses the baptism lives on then) why do you as Booker drown your own drat self (twice!?)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:If Comstock never exists then none of this does, meaning Anna(Elizabeth) goes on to live a normal life with a drunk irresponsible father rather than living a sheltered life with an irresponsible father drunk on power. Of course if none of this happened then Elizabeth could not have possibly existed to convince the Proto-Comstock to kill himself, which means he didn't, which means he did exist, which means she did exist, which means she could, which means she couldn't, etc. Of course, if the universe worked that way then it would have ended long ago. What this endless loop really did was create an Infinite number of Alternate Earths where Anna and Booker get to live without Comstocks interference, because as long as he existed, any reality where Booker and Anna existed would have to deal with him. She added a third option to the choice at the Baptism: an edge to the coin. *EDIT* Yes, I just responded to an argument about time travel in a video game with another video game that does it both worse and better. RickVoid fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Jul 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Well while it does affect innumerable other timelines and universes, the fact is that Elizabeth going back to the Baptism directly affects "our" Booker as well because he will only ever go on to refuse the Baptism, have Anna but this time he'll accrue gambling debt but not be given the option to pawn his daughter for money. So even though other permutations are affected and happen, the ones most immediately relevant to the content of the game are what matter, even if everything they've done together is completely reset to nil, they go on to live comparatively normal lives as far as they're concerned (which is to say they aren't concerned because they'll never know it all happened). What happens to the other worlds no longer matters because they've at least undone what was so directly affecting them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 21:40
|
|
|
Yeah so basically, Bioshock Infinite has a stupid dumb ending.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
I wonder when writers are going to start noticing that using quantum stuff and time travel in their stories just makes them jumbled messes most of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
In my day plots relied on amnesia, multiple personalities and everything being a dream after all and we liked it!
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
Internet Janitor posted:In my day plots relied on amnesia, multiple personalities and everything being a dream after all and we liked it! And when someone got amnesia, to cure them you hit them in the head, same as what caused the amnesia in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Someone asked about the ending credits music, but I don't know if Sundowner has anything special prepared for some sort of grand finale. The bit at the end showing off Booker calling out "Anna?" to the crib, without actually showing if the baby is in that crib is technically a post-credit scene that you could have missed entirely! So there was some seamless editing done there. Regardless, here's God Only Knows, starting off the credits. Listening to it after the update, it's probably an (unintentional) stroke of genius to end the game with, by lyrics alone.The Beach Boys posted:I may not always love you Not going to debate that the ending had a lot of confusing things in it, especially if you missed the logs from Rosalind Lutece to understand the motive of Robert for wanting to "correct" the horrible mess that he unknowingly set off, before the sabotage and destruction of the Lutece Dimension-Hopping Teleportation Machine (tm). In one of them, and it's backed up because you see it happening in this update, Rosalind says the advanced aging started screwing up because Comstock himself hopped into Booker's reality to get the daughter he couldn't have from hopping into other worlds. But its out of left field if you didn't find literally everything to tie together the convoluted mess that is "time" in this game. Did you notice that every Lutece log in the game is done by Rosalind? Robert never appears, except in the opening title card, the bit about memories, signed R. Lutece, verbatim from the scene at the very end of the game bringing Booker over, and how his theory works because he had personally experienced it. Audio logs that contain really important plot information shouldn't be optional and hidden, that's just rushed and or badly conceived design, given everything else that had to be taken out from the E3 Demo (like choosable vigors that have a stock like ammunition, the interaction with tears and the environment, the entire feel of the area leading up to Comstock House, the Vox not being as bad a party as they are portrayed in the finished game...so many things). Still, the stars and the lighthouses and the lead-up to "There's always a Man. There's always a City. There's always a Lighthouse." sent shivers up my spine just from how everything was delivered. With so much stuff to take in, I really wish they could have fleshed out the scene a lot more than what we got, but maybe the DLC could clear some of that up. Looking forward to that if you're going to LP it, Sundowner, and thank you for keeping this one alive. You rock.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
How could Elizabeth and Booker use the Bathyspheres when they were coded only to respond to Andrew Ryan's DNA? ^ This is a Bioshock 1 spoiler.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Jenner posted:How could Elizabeth and Booker use the Bathyspheres when they were coded only to respond to Andrew Ryan's DNA? Booker hosed a Russian and neglected his genius son Andrei, booyah.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
J.theYellow posted:Booker hosed a Russian and neglected his genius son Andrei, booyah. Jesus the man is so bad of a father that two different dystopias have been borne out of his balls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
An upcoming DLC pack ends with Anna spinning on the edge of the table, but cuts to black before we see whether she stops or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
I don't think "our" (122nd?) Booker is a Booker that gave away Anna. He swears he didn't give away any kid, I think he mentioned earlier in the game that his wife died with his child, and only "remembers" after his nose bleeds/gets fuzzy which indicates he's ... fused or absorbed other-timeline Booker(s). But he does drown. So what's the deal with that? I don't think I'm making this up. I might be remembering inaccurately.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
Remember when Robert and Rosalind where carrying him in the rain after he walked through the tear? They said he was fabricating memories based on his old ones. One of those fabricated memories was that his wife and child died because in Comstock's timeline, his would-be wife is probably still alive and Anna is never born. In his timeline it was "bring us YOUR girl to wipe away your debt" but when he jumped timelines his memories get all fucky and it became "bring us THAT girl and wipe away the debt" - they never told him that initially, he fabricates the memory and they use some social engineering trickery to reinforce that that is the reason why Book is here, even though strictly speaking it isn't, except it is. This all makes a tad more sense if you assume the Lutece twins are playing puppet master with Booker an infinite number of times until he does The Right Thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
something something monkeys typewriters Shakespeare infinite bioshock this ending is so loving dumb
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:Remember when Robert and Rosalind where carrying him in the rain after he walked through the tear? They said he was fabricating memories based on his old ones. One of those fabricated memories was that his wife and child died because in Comstock's timeline, his would-be wife is probably still alive and Anna is never born. In his timeline it was "bring us YOUR girl to wipe away your debt" but when he jumped timelines his memories get all fucky and it became "bring us THAT girl and wipe away the debt" - they never told him that initially, he fabricates the memory and they use some social engineering trickery to reinforce that that is the reason why Book is here, even though strictly speaking it isn't, except it is. All of which ignores that enemies were freaking out and talking about how they remembered being dead when you jumped causality lines. Those jumps also largely ignore the fact that there should have been extra Booker's and Elizabeth's running around. Well in one of the lines Booker was a Vox Populi hero, but you never saw them in the other lines.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Clearly the Bookers and Elizabeths are always playing musical universes any time they jump. So while Booker A is in Universe B, Booker B is busy in Universe C. Until they converge in the Sea of Doors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
I think the ending's pretty cool. I'm totally OK with Comstock being alternate-history Booker and Elizabeth being his daughter that he gave up, etc etc. My one problem with it, though, is the thing where the player has to become Booker/Comstock being drowned. One Booker rejected the baptism, the other was baptised and "reborn" as Comstock. The one that needs to die is the one that was baptised. Why does player-Booker need to inhabit the body of Comstock during the baptism for Elizabeth to drown him? The way its done implies that Elizabeth is drowning Booker before he runs away from the baptism. Elizabeth says "you chose to walk away... but in other oceans, you didn't." And that he needs to be smothered "Before the choice is made. Before you are reborn." Thus killing both Booker and Comstock and erasing herself from existence. But surely the more logical thing is if Elizabeth smothers the version that chooses the baptism. That way Booker still exists, and Elizabeth still exists, as Anna, she is never sold to Comstock because Comstock doesn't exist. And that's what most people in this thread think happened. But if that's the case, then there's no need for Booker to be part of the process, he doesn't have to sacrifice himself, the Elizabeths can just go and drown Comstock during the baptism. The way they did the ending, it really looks like all versions of Booker are being killed, and that's why Booker himself had to agree. The fact that Booker is alive after the credits and that there is DLC suggests that "all Bookers and all Elizabeths cease to exist" is NOT the true ending. But to me it seems like that's the impression they wanted to give with the baptism death scene.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
Sundowner posted:Remember when Robert and Rosalind where carrying him in the rain after he walked through the tear? They said he was fabricating memories based on his old ones. You're right, that slipped from my mind. I'm curious to see what the DLC is like since I've unintentionally managed to not read or watch anything about it since it was announced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:22
|
|
|
The ending of Infinite is interesting compared to most shooty games. It's definitely dumb as hell, but I'd rather have games shoot for the moon and miss than be forgettable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
your evil twin posted:The fact that Booker is alive after the credits and that there is DLC suggests that "all Bookers and all Elizabeths cease to exist" is NOT the true ending. But to me it seems like that's the impression they wanted to give with the baptism death scene. Well, only Elizabeth ceases to exist because she's never sold to alt-timeline Comstock. That said, there's probably some permutations where Booker names his daughter Elizabeth or some such poo poo I dunno. As for why the player Booker becomes Comstock. It's more impactful to the player to have yourself drowned. Sure, killing the main character is a common cliche that can feel overdone in games, but this one subverts it with quantum shenanigans, as you're at that point Schrödinger's Booker. Giggs posted:I'm curious to see what the DLC is like since I've unintentionally managed to not read or watch anything about it since it was announced. You and me both and I was LPing the drat game for a year!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
It's interesting to read these (possible?) explanations as to the game's story, because personally, I didn't really even try to think about it. For me, as soon as 'multiple dimensions' was introduced as a plot point, I pretty much checked out of the story. I don't know if I mean that as a criticism of Bioshock Infinite specifically though; if any game/novel/movie/etc goes there it just seems like they could do and justify anything plot-wise. Absolutely any twist they want is fair game; it may as well be pure chaos. Maybe it's just a personal reaction... but to remain invested in the story I felt like I'd need to understand infinity (hence the name Bioshock Infinite, I guess). Reading that back, it sounds pretty negative. I did actually enjoy the game! It was just for the amazing art (and sound design) and mostly-good gameplay, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
your evil twin posted:One Booker rejected the baptism, the other was baptised and "reborn" as Comstock. The one that needs to die is the one that was baptised. Why does player-Booker need to inhabit the body of Comstock during the baptism for Elizabeth to drown him? You could infer that Booker choosing to smother Comstock in his crib, would mean that this Booker, who is now standing in place for the Booker who would have been there, would consistently choose to take the baptism. Elizabeth does, after all, ask him if he's really sure he wants to go through with his plan, and Booker emphatically agrees. Thus, by inserting this specific Booker into that point in time, Elizabeth has jury rigged a constant, or at least converged all Baptism Acceptance variables into this specific point. After all, the timeline doesn't necessarily care about whether this Booker will become Comstock, it just needs a Booker in that point in time. And Elizabeth doesn't have a Comstock handy, nor would a Comstock be handy, in order for her to amputate this variable. She does, however, have a very dedicated Booker handy. Doing it this way removes Comstock from ever meddling in Booker's life, and much like the mind struggling to create memories, so too does the universe thereby create a new timeline where Booker and Anna are together. Or, perhaps, Comstock meddling was itself another variable, and the ending is that timeline. Who that Booker is, is a mystery, though it's possible that it's a whole new Booker who is having a flashback to the timeline that we play in. That's how I've come to understand it, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
I'm glad all the timelines and stuff are being posted, since there's a lot of small things to set in place. I'd forgotten about the Comstock voxophone that mentioned "teepees in [his] family tree". I love time fuckery and that part didn't bug me, since tears were everywhere in the game. In fact, I'm even okay with all the Bookers who attended the baptism being dead, since this closes all timelines related to Comstock. AstroWhale posted:How did Comstock know about the AD symbol on Bookers hand? Why are the Lutteces wondering about it? Shouldn't they know about the false shepherd? This is my problem. I understand why Booker gave Anna to Comstock, but why did Comstock take Anna from Booker? Yes, Comstock is sterile, and his wife hates him, and he can now afford to pay off the debts he racked up once upon a time. And yes, Anna is his true daughter, but I still don't think that's a strong enough reason for him to take the only thing worthwhile from Booker. He's revisiting the decision from the other side, and still chooses to cause himself anguish. Not only that but Comstock becomes a Prophet, and tells all of Columbia that a down-and-outer who branded himself in self hatred might show up at some point. So, uh, look out for the karmic harbinger with AD on his hand. It's not like your Prophet made any hasty decisions, and now has his own debt to pay. I have to assume that Comstock knows what happens if Anna is left with a drunk and broke Booker (thanks to the tears?). Maybe malnutrition or worse? Or maybe he knows that losing Anna is the only thing that got Booker sober and on his feet again? That sounds really backwards, if anything it would make the drinking worse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
PRL412 posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
So if I'm getting this right, Elizabeth's goal is to end all the infinite branches of Comstock-existence by going to the very beginning of the branch and cutting it off, aka drowning the Bookers who accepted being baptized and turned loopy. But what if an infinite amount of Comstocks chickened out of the infinite Elizabeths drowning him with her infinite hands and pushed the infinite Elizabeths out of his way and started being Comstock the Jerk again? I mean at least one of the scenarios would have that happen right? But... then that means that she didn't end all the Comstock branches and the drowning was just another non-factor in the timeline. What. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
JossiRossi posted:Interesting that an arbitrary binary choice the player CAN NOT make is apparently the most important thing to the multiverse, but arbitrary binary choices the player CAN make in the game are totally pointless. This isn't a valid objection in terms of story. Booker knew no more about time travel and multiverses at the beginning than the player knew what was going on. By the time Elizabeth got godlike powers and came by like, "oh yeah, by the way" it was too late for him. He was stuck in his shoes unable to change the past (unlike Elizabeth) and so was the player. That's a good use of theme. Elizabeth takes the "kill em all just to be sure" approach that 100% achievement players take. Ken Levine's patting himself on the back for being meta. Anyway, there's nothing Booker can do about it because his hindsight doesn't enable him to change anything. No reloading the save this time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 04:37
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
Heehee Hartlocks posted:So if I'm getting this right, Elizabeth's goal is to end all the infinite branches of Comstock-existence by going to the very beginning of the branch and cutting it off, aka drowning the Bookers who accepted being baptized and turned loopy. Shh shh shh. It's okay. Have a pill. It's blue!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:He had a vision that Columbia would fail if his daughter didn't follow him. That's the start and end of it. That he rendered himself sterile required...creative reinterpretation of how to produce that daughter. Are Comstock's visions from the infinite possible timelines seen in tears? Let's say Comstock realizes that he must steal from Booker to become Comstock. Does he still see himself as god-like or as someone who obeys the laws of time and space? Does he see this as borrowing happiness from himself? Or is this the point where he accepts that his deeds have caught up with him and is simply waiting for Booker to undo his legacy? Because he's inviting war to Columbia - a war the he's won 121 times - but war none the less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
Antistar01 posted:Absolutely any twist they want is fair game; it may as well be pure chaos. I think part of the problem is that the writers left some things ambiguous in order to facilitate engagement, but they left too many significant things either optional or unexplained. If you found every Voxophone, paid attention to all the dialogue, noticed all the nose-bleeding/fuzzy-eyed moments and what caused them etc, the story should make sense. This is not the case. They set up this universe, explained a number of the rules that govern it, but then kinda just worked around them in places. For instance, why would Chen Lin and those guards at the prison be all kooky from dying in alternate timelines? Everyone must be dead in other simultaneous timelines anyway, yet no one else is phase shifting and waxing philosophical.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2014 04:50
|
|