SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion
- Thread starter thomasmahler
- Start date
How did you gather that "I don't know what I'm talking about?" I'm not far from the point where you find shock jockey.
Mutanthands
Member
No. Someone made a compelling argument that the two represent exactly the same thing (Elizabeth's captivity).
Still a lot of game to go from that moment. I mean a lot.
The way the narrative is paced it doesn't start coming together until the last 15 minutes or so.
You are literally at the beginning of the game.
disappeared
Banned
Ken said the dlc will be "alternate" stories in Columbia, with allusions to the original BioShock apparently.
Dude.
Da Fuck
Your like in the first 15 minutes of the film, and bashing it because you don't like the narrative/being stupid.
Da fuck dude.
Your sooo early on. Do you have some secret agenda here? Just trolling? Or what, I mean christ.
If you told me you were like half way through, than fine I would respect what your saying.
But c'mon.
Oh, barely half way though a game, you can definately say you know what you are talking about then, my mistake.
Reading forums posts and piecing the story together defeats the whole point of a narrative driven interactive experience.
He has like 10 hours to go. Still can't believe he jumped into this thread.
Mh. I expected as such. I always guessed they'd just flesh out the whole clash between the factions by making you play as a random vox populi or the other way around or something
It's just that if it doesnt involve something more related to the main story or at least the scope of it, it just doesnt sound that interesting
i'd be down to playing as different booker in another universe for example. I mean they can go everywhere
I didn't say that the narrative was stupid nor am I bashing it. What's wrong with you? Relax.
It probably will. It's supposed to flesh out the main narrative, and lore as well.
You've still got a few hours before the actual plot starts to reveal itself.
I hope they go pretty crazy with the DLC. I'd even welcome something like what Arkane is doing with the Daud stuff in Dishonored.
If that's what I was doing then you'd have a point but your wrong so yeah. I'll just continue to push through this and see what happens. Thanks for the not so constructive feedback.
What's wrong with me is the fact your seemingly giving up on this game, and calling the narrative nothing mind blowing when you have barely even scratched the surface.
It's irritating, that's all.
LumpOfCole
Member
I'm the only one left who remembers the Infinite Earths. You see, I know the truth. I remember all that happened, and I'm not going to forget. Worlds lived, worlds died. Nothing will ever be the same. But those were great days for me... I had a good friend in the good old days, really. He was the Anti-Monitor. He was going to give me a world to rule. Now he's gone, too. But that's okay with me. You see, I like to remember the past because those were better times than now. I mean, I'd rather live in the past than today, wouldn't you? I mean, nothing's ever certain anymore. Nothing's ever predictable like it used to be. These days... y-you just never know who's going to die... and who's going to live.
Psycho Pirate, Crisis on Infinite Bioshocks #12. p. 42.
Psycho Pirate, Crisis on Infinite Bioshocks #12. p. 42.
Well to be fair to him, it seems like from his posting history, he doesn't like narrative focused games. This game, Uncharted 3, he has no interest in The Last of Us which probably will be pretty narrative focused, etc...
But he did like Gears of War. Maybe there's not enough dudebro in this game to hold his attention.
what the fuck am i reading?
bodyofanamerican
Member
You know what was fucking awesome? How the whole game I'm wondering "where the fuck is this siren enemy they talked about last year?" and it's fucking Elizabeth's mom. So awesome.
MaximumFlipFlop
Banned
The twist definitely got me good. Was not a fan of the gameplay at all. Can't see myself replaying it for that reason :/
Dat $60 PSN digital release, gotta eat this one.
Dat $60 PSN digital release, gotta eat this one.
SixMachine
Member
So is there an equivalent to getting your face ripped off by Black Adam in Bioshock?
I wouldn't even say the game is entirely reliant on its narrative though. I quite like the combat in Infinite, even if it means they've had to move away from the big hub style areas in SS2 and Bioshock. To me Infinite is alot like a mix of Bioshock and Half-Life 2. It nails the first person story telling and has unique and interesting combat, but mixes in some low-level RPG systems too.
I feel like they might have run out of buttons on a controller to do everything they'd want to be able to do. Combat was definitely not the greatest, but there wasn't anything overly wrong with it.
Dude what are you doing in a spoiler thread when you're like an hour into the game?
Seriously, just close your browser and finish the game before you post in this thread again. It doesn't make sense to try to contribute to theories when you don't even know what happens. At this point, you'd probably thing Fight Club was about a guy starting a fight club to relive stress.
That's totally untrue. I love a good narrative. I didn't like UC3 because it wasn't even close to 2 and I like gears because it's fun, not because it's written well.
Lighten up sheesh. You take this shit waaaay too seriously. Games are supposed to be about fun right?
Indeed. Games are supposed to be fun. If you aren't having fun, then you should just stop playing. That's all it comes down to.
The problem is that most of us hold this narrative in very high regard.
So, we, or at the very least I, take some offense to someone whose criticizing the narrative whose barely scratched the surface to what's occurring.
What was everyone's strategy for those bullet sponge enemies?
Like the ones with armor? Or Elizibeth's mother?
I had this piece of clothing that gave enemies a vulnerability debuff where you would do 2x damage for 5 seconds after a melee attack.
Combine that with a charge upgrade that gives you 5 seconds of invulnerability.
I would charge in and just blast them up, maybe combined with a bronco or shock jockey to stun everybody.
Like the ones with armor? Or Elizibeth's mother?
I had this piece of clothing that gave enemies a vulnerability debuff where you would do 2x damage for 5 seconds after a melee attack.
Combine that with a charge upgrade that gives you 5 seconds of invulnerability.
I would charge in and just blast them up, maybe combined with a bronco or shock jockey to stun everybody.
But what you shouldn't do is ride someone because they have a different opinion than you. I asked a question or rather made a statement and the assholes come out.
Play it on easy next time?
I wasn't criticizing the narrative--at least not like how you're making it sound. Forget I even said anything. Had I known it would've turned out like this I wouldn't have said anything at all.
movie_club
Junior Member
this.
And the motivation..? Rosalind critically refers to it as her companions thought experiment in the beginning.
"The mind of the subject will desperately struggle to create memories where none exist..."
―Rosalind Lutece, Barriers to Trans-Dimensional Travel, 1889
Maxed out the RPG/Heater and just kept firing away.
Also, my friend told me that playing it on easy doesn't get you the full ending...I inadvertently spoiled it for him when he wanted to talk about it. You don't end up seeing a bunch of Elizabeths kill you. It just goes to the credits after you open the door and see the guy ask to baptize you.
Stronghammer22
Member
It is definitely intentionally left ambiguous. I doubt we will ever know for sure whether she is there. There are no noises from the crib. The date on the desk aligns with the exact date that Lutece came to take Anna and instead of opening the door with your right hand (which potentially could show the "AD" carving), you open it with your left. It's Irrational fucking with us, lol.
For Handymen I outmaneuvered them and used shock jockey when they got too close. For Lady Comstock I stayed at a safe distance and picked off any visible zombie of hers so she'd move into my line of sight and remain still long enough for me to do some damage. Mostly I used a carbine or sniper rifle for that.
MaximumFlipFlop
Banned
Death was a non issue. I feel like there are so many great ideas there, but it just didn't grab me. Very little responsiveness from enemies while being shot. Pretty much every enemy was a bullet sponge. I don't know, it would have been great to have gameplay that compliments that awesome story. But it just felt like a slog, and the only thing keeping me going was wondering what the story would lead to. I wish I could want to replay simply to have fun duking it out with Columbias enemies again.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
The Booker that you're playing as, was a different one than who gave up his daughter, right? His nose bleeds indicate memories (from other versions of him) being fused with his own, I thought.
Either that, or how did he get his memories erased and not know Elizabeth was his daughter until the end?
I was thinking that Letuce(sp?) just grabbed a random Booker with debt and said "Get this girl and erase the debt". Then that Booker has memories rush in of him giving up a baby (where he says "I would never give a baby of mine away") that he never had.
(I'm sleepy haha)
Either that, or how did he get his memories erased and not know Elizabeth was his daughter until the end?
I was thinking that Letuce(sp?) just grabbed a random Booker with debt and said "Get this girl and erase the debt". Then that Booker has memories rush in of him giving up a baby (where he says "I would never give a baby of mine away") that he never had.
(I'm sleepy haha)
For what it's worth on easy most enemies die with 2-3 shots.
movie_club
Junior Member
But if he knows DeWitt is coming then doesnt he know that the Lurece's are bringing him?! And since he killed them ..
confused
It's probably the same. He was saying "Anna... anna" when the Luteces abducted him. Anyway this is my problem with stories involving infinite universes. At a certain point, why bother? There are infinite universes with infinite possibilities, having one disrupt the others just for the sake of one New York attack seems selfish to me.
But I guess some people may be right in their interpretation that this story was based around the guilt of the Lutece's, since none of it really needed to happen. Existentialism is such a tricky plot point, when you start asking why do anything anyway.
Oh shit, I just realized what happened. This has probably been pointed out plenty of times or should've been obvious, but:
Booker A
Booker gave away Anna due to debt, felt extreme guilt, got baptized/reborn, changed his name to Comstock, built Columbia with help of the brother/sister scientists, missed his daughter, built a "tear" to take back his daughter.
Booker B
Same events as Booker A except the baptism, couldn't forgive himself, so baptism never happened, Lutece sibling offers Booker a chance to see his daughter again.
Two Bookers in the same universe cause Booker B to have memory loss, since Booker A in his universe didn't experience what Booker B did in his universe. And Booker B being in that universe with those circumstances causes him to only remember the last thing both Booker's would remember.
Am I close at all? Did I interpret most of it correctly?
Booker A
Booker gave away Anna due to debt, felt extreme guilt, got baptized/reborn, changed his name to Comstock, built Columbia with help of the brother/sister scientists, missed his daughter, built a "tear" to take back his daughter.
Booker B
Same events as Booker A except the baptism, couldn't forgive himself, so baptism never happened, Lutece sibling offers Booker a chance to see his daughter again.
Two Bookers in the same universe cause Booker B to have memory loss, since Booker A in his universe didn't experience what Booker B did in his universe. And Booker B being in that universe with those circumstances causes him to only remember the last thing both Booker's would remember.
Am I close at all? Did I interpret most of it correctly?
Deputy Dangle
Member
I have been trying my best to catch up on all 29 pages of this thread while reading ever post. I'm about halfway. There have been numerous instants where someone brings up a moment that I forgot about that adds another layer to the story or thinks of an idea that changes up even my own theory. Regardless, this thread has been a fascinating read and I hope it continues. This post is more of a bookmark of my ideas, theory, etc as of right now.
Currently, I think DoctorWho has summed up the most comprehensible theory of how the multiple timelines generally worked out with a Blue and Red Universe or for me, Universe 1 and Universe 2.
However once it gets to the end of the Red Universe/ Universe 2 timeline where the Luteces realize that they need to bring back Booker to Columbia in order to stop Comstock, I'm definitely thinking that some fabrication of memories on Booker's part played a factor here. The quote at the beginning of the game alludes to this. After Booker sold Anna for the debt, he must have forged a memory over time where he forgot about Anna entirely and went back into debt for one reason or another once he had sunk to rock bottom if you will. This then allowed the Luteces an opportunity to swoop in.
Then comes my theory of Universe 3 which I think I got from somewhere but have forgotten. Universe 3 is the third timeline that came from the thought of the last Elizabeth not disappearing at the end as well as the final post credits scene. Basically Universe 3 is Booker not even considering the baptism. Hell, he may have not even participated in the war. Ultimately, he still ends up in New York with Anna with the gambling and the debt, but through some possible tinkering of Booker's memory from Elizabeth, he has a moment of clarity and realizes he didn't know what he was missing until it was gone. So I think of it as something like a happy ending.
Now the scene at the end of the game where you are barely unconscious while being dragged by the Luteces toward what I assume is the dock or boat (I don't fully remember) while wearing the same getup they were in the opening is something that I feel a little hazy about. Maybe someone can help me piece that together? I'm unsure right now where that fits into everything and is maybe related to Booker passing out after being baptized.
And while I have being hearing about variations of theories where people believe Booker had Anna before the life changing baptism, I am definitely a believer that he accepted/denied the baptism before he had Anna.
That's as far as I think I have gotten right now so I look forward to reading more. I knew with Bioshock that Ken Levine was a very meticulous guy, but Infinite is proof that you can really take attention to detail to the extreme. What a game, man!
Currently, I think DoctorWho has summed up the most comprehensible theory of how the multiple timelines generally worked out with a Blue and Red Universe or for me, Universe 1 and Universe 2.
However once it gets to the end of the Red Universe/ Universe 2 timeline where the Luteces realize that they need to bring back Booker to Columbia in order to stop Comstock, I'm definitely thinking that some fabrication of memories on Booker's part played a factor here. The quote at the beginning of the game alludes to this. After Booker sold Anna for the debt, he must have forged a memory over time where he forgot about Anna entirely and went back into debt for one reason or another once he had sunk to rock bottom if you will. This then allowed the Luteces an opportunity to swoop in.
Then comes my theory of Universe 3 which I think I got from somewhere but have forgotten. Universe 3 is the third timeline that came from the thought of the last Elizabeth not disappearing at the end as well as the final post credits scene. Basically Universe 3 is Booker not even considering the baptism. Hell, he may have not even participated in the war. Ultimately, he still ends up in New York with Anna with the gambling and the debt, but through some possible tinkering of Booker's memory from Elizabeth, he has a moment of clarity and realizes he didn't know what he was missing until it was gone. So I think of it as something like a happy ending.
Now the scene at the end of the game where you are barely unconscious while being dragged by the Luteces toward what I assume is the dock or boat (I don't fully remember) while wearing the same getup they were in the opening is something that I feel a little hazy about. Maybe someone can help me piece that together? I'm unsure right now where that fits into everything and is maybe related to Booker passing out after being baptized.
And while I have being hearing about variations of theories where people believe Booker had Anna before the life changing baptism, I am definitely a believer that he accepted/denied the baptism before he had Anna.
That's as far as I think I have gotten right now so I look forward to reading more. I knew with Bioshock that Ken Levine was a very meticulous guy, but Infinite is proof that you can really take attention to detail to the extreme. What a game, man!
short answer no
I think this will help you guys.
Dewitt fought at Wounded Knee.
After that battle he went to a baptism to cleanse his sins, at this point the timelines diverged.
Dewitt either atoned for his sins, accepted baptism and began Columbia.
Or he rejected the baptism, began drinking and gambling, eventually had Elizabeth/Anna, and then sold her to Comstock
This is why Slate claims that Comstock was never at Wounded Knee, but Comstock references it constantly. He actually was there, but fought under a different name, Booker.
Here is a pretty thorough explanation http://www.reddit.com/r/Bioshock/comments/1b4fmx/my_detailed_ending_explanation_my_attempt_at_the/
FunkyMunkey
Banned
True. Or maybe they told him her name was Anna and he was just repeating it delusional-like? He seemed very drugged. And when he looked at the picture of Elizabeth at the beginning in the boat, he didn't seem to treat it like a photo of his daughter, just a picture of his objective. Yeah probably the simple answer, though.
Or they erased his memories, but that seems like a lame cop-out.
Well he wouldn't recognize his daughter at her age when he gave her away at only a few months old.
They didn't erase his memories, but when you are forced into a different timeline, your body creates memories to fill the narrative.
Robert Lautec says it a couple times and its in some Voxophones.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Ahhhh yeah, I forgot about that.
Why would he keep saying "Get the girl, erase the debt" if that Booker already gave up his daughter to erase that debt?
This game was something special, imo. Great fun.
It seems to be a pivotal moment for Booker, his life changed completely when Robert Lautec came in and uttered that phrase to him.
Hes been thinking about that night for over a year.
Its not surprising that his brain latched onto that phrase when he got pulled into the new timeline to explain his circumstance.
ChimpBottle
Member
Hang on, so before the events of the game, Booker has debts so he gives away his baby to Comstock because Booker is Comstock and Mrs. Comstock can't conceive and Comstock needs his biological daughter to gain power in Columbia (right?) So why does Booker go to Columbia to get Eliazabeth to erase his debts if he already did so by giving away his baby?
I dunno, maybe I'm misinterpreting a few things (probably everything)
I dunno, maybe I'm misinterpreting a few things (probably everything)
Similar threads
- Poll