SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion

Such a great game. Gameplay was decent, shooting was a little off. Vigors are cool, but I only used the same 2-3 through out the whole game.

The story is really good. I figured the lack of plot at the start would lead to a twist sooner or later. My memory is bad, and I had to rush through it (I borrowed it).

But why didn't the twins just tell him the whole story? At the start he still has all his memories, they could have just told him that he was about to rescue his daughter. I don't get the risk in telling Booker everything before or after he reaches Columbia. Only reason I can think of is the twins went through a lot of trial and error with other Bookers. But IIRC at the end Liz tells Booker they all wind up at the Light house anyways. Was holding out info really the only way he would be "ok" with sacrificing himself at the end?


And the post credits scene...If they killed every Booker before the baptism, then who is this one? An alternate universe where there wasn't a baptism at all?
 
I'm fine with Shock games always having the same notes (formerly cool setting turned evil and twisted by dark powers, survival-horror elements, powerful dangerous intelligences, manipulation of the player's character, etc.) It's a cool enough style. But to have each story be variations of Bioshock/BI would be too much.

BI felt different enough that I didn't complain while still making me appreciate that they did use the same tropes as BS1. It might be hard to pull off a ton more times, but I would be interested to see 1 more.
 
What side story is left to be explored?

The creation of songbird?

Bioshock 1 levels with Infinite's combat system? bringing back lock-on sonic and knuckles with sonic 3 style
I'm hoping we get Songbird's backstory, a story dealing with some of the other Founders, and something that really leans into the multiverse stuff.

Kinda want multiplayer as well, but it might be too big an undertaking for DLC.
 
It's just when I see one to one correspondence posts like the one showing that Comstock is Andrew Ryan, Daisy Fitzroy is Atlas/Fontaine, etc., I don't think it's clever, I think it's Bioware-esque recycling of The Hero with Thousand Faces.

Don't get me wrong, I think a game that explores multiverses would be cool, but they would need to commit to it fully for that, not redo the same story in different settings.
 
About your whole vigor speech here. You seem to be making an assumption that messes up the rest of your discussion. When people say that they don't want to use vigors because they are untested, you seem to be assuming that people are worried about what the vigors can do on an extrenal level. To me, it appears they are worried about what it does on an internal level. No one cares that devil's kiss may burn down a house or two, they are worried that it might shorten their life span by 40 years. I'm sorry that the vigors and plasmids are such huge parts of the story to you but that is really only a small thing compared to what the true scope is. The story is the city and the man's interaction with that city and it's leader. That has always been and always will be the main scope of the Bioshock franchise. The plasmids/vigors are such a small part of the city that they don't need a multitude of explanation. They do make the city unique of course but so does the cities leaders, factions, and location.

I really don't think I am making assumptions about why people would use them, and that's my entire point. Given some of the things that happen in the story, you'd think people wouldn't mind maybe throwing caution to the wind and using a Vigor when, say, they're also picking up rifles and running into battle? That risk factor would work if they didn't go on to show scenes were the usefulness would trump the risk in any given situation. And to me, it is important to the city and characters because given what the story and the background of the city are, having what could basically turn any person into a superhuman in a racially tense environment is an enormous elephant in the room. But I guess who cares, considering they get bored and drop that story element half way through the game!

And it wouldn't be so bad if this was the only plot point that wasn't adequately explained, I'd say "OK, I get it, you wanted to bring back the gameplay from Bio1 and couldn't find a way to." But they drop the ball on so many other fundamental background elements that I can't forgive them for it.
 
Such a great game. Gameplay was decent, shooting was a little off. Vigors are cool, but I only used the same 2-3 through out the whole game.

The story is really good. I figured the lack of plot at the start would lead to a twist sooner or later. My memory is bad, and I had to rush through it (I borrowed it).

But why didn't the twins just tell him the whole story? At the start he still has all his memories, they could have just told him that he was about to rescue his daughter. I don't get the risk in telling Booker everything before or after he reaches Columbia. Only reason I can think of is the twins went through a lot of trial and error with other Bookers. But IIRC at the end Liz tells Booker they all wind up at the Light house anyways. Was holding out info really the only way he would be "ok" with sacrificing himself at the end?


And the post credits scene...If they killed every Booker before the baptism, then who is this one? An alternate universe where there wasn't a baptism at all?

The twins may have told him the whole story and that messed things up there for some reason, as you said. Elizabeth at the end doesn't say all Bookers make it to the lighthouses, only the successful ones.

As for the post credits scene, I still feel like it is too out of place to be the original vision but you can either assume that Booker is stuck in a loop (look through my post history, I posted my thought on this this morning or you can assume that was a Booker that never attended Wounded Knee/The Baptism.
 
Would be cool if they made System Shock 2 under a different name while naming everything else different aswell. Would the get away with it ?
 
Wasn't the Slate question answered well enough?

Slate and Booker(all timelines) fight together in wounded knee. In universe Comstock, the (now aged and unrecognizable) prophet brings Slate up to be Columbia's general. Comstock secedes from the Union after the boxer rebellion. Slate, a Civil War Union vet, is really upset by that (as indicated by a Voxophone/thing Slate says). Slate swithches sides to the Vox populii. Comstock fills his army with patriots(drones). Slate fights back. Slate sees Booker, feels like his men could get a good samurai/klingon style death from someone like Booker instead of a motorized Washington.

Where's there confusion?
 
Shoot just read this somewhere else (gamers with jobs), stop me if it was posted here before.

But couldn't the archangel be the older Elizabeth who destroys New York and believed Comstock and all that. She had control over her powers, but went crazy. Perhaps that why Comstock said "the archangel told me I needed an heir" or whatever, else she would not exist. It still needs some flushing out, but it's a thought.

Old Elizabeth didn't have control over her powers. The operation was performed to create an extremely painful response to her opening tears, this association would then lead her not to create them. She never broke the siphon either so it seems likely that it would have drained her of most of her power. She even states when she brings Booker forward that it took everything she had. It seems extremely unlikely that she could have possibly shown Comstock and the Luteces even state that their machine showed New York being burnt down.
 
My first thought at the 'twist' of Elizabeth/AD being Booker's daughter: aw, how sad

My second thought: Japan is going to love this
 
I really don't think I am making assumptions about why people would use them, and that's my entire point. Given some of the things that happen in the story, you'd think people wouldn't mind maybe throwing caution to the wind and using a Vigor when, say, they're also picking up rifles and running into battle? That risk factor would work if they didn't go on to show scenes were the usefulness would trump the risk in any given situation. And to me, it is important to the city and characters because given what the story and the background of the city are, having what could basically turn any person into a superhuman in a racially tense environment is an enormous elephant in the room. But I guess who cares, considering they get bored and drop that story element half way through the game!

And it wouldn't be so bad if this was the only plot point that wasn't adequately explained, I'd say "OK, I get it, you wanted to bring back the gameplay from Bio1 and couldn't find a way to." But they drop the ball on so many other fundamental background elements that I can't forgive them for it.

I can maybe see your point for the Vox because overthrowing a city is a desperate move and they would be more desperate to throw caution to the wind. When you are fighting Columbia security though? Why would they take desperate measures like that. They are just the police and things escalete so quickly that they think you are just a single man and they can take you out.

I'm still waiting for someone to nit pick another plot point that wasn't adequately explained. Within the game, I am confident there is an explanation for everything.

Edit: Oh wait, I will throw in one thing that I feel like came out of left field. The whole siren/ghost thing. I know that they explain it through Elizabeth opening tears with wish-fulfillment but it seems like that was an early idea in developement that was cut and played with and this plot point somehow still made the cut while missing other things.
 
Wasn't the Slate question answered well enough?

Slate and Booker(all timelines) fight together in wounded knee. In universe Comstock, the (now aged and unrecognizable) prophet brings Slate up to be Columbia's general. Comstock secedes from the Union after the boxer rebellion. Slate, a Civil War Union vet, is really upset by that (as indicated by a Voxophone/thing Slate says). Slate swithches sides to the Vox populii. Comstock fills his army with patriots(drones). Slate fights back. Slate sees Booker, feels like his men could get a good samurai/klingon style death from someone like Booker instead of a motorized Washington.

Where's there confusion?

I don't get the confusion either, thank you for making a concise post about it though. I tend to get really long-winded in this thread.

Edit: Damn it, this thread has been moving so fast today that I expected there to already be 5 more posts between my two, sorry for the double.
 
Old Elizabeth didn't have control over her powers. The operation was performed to create an extremely painful response to her opening tears, this association would then lead her not to create them. She never broke the siphon either so it seems likely that it would have drained her of most of her power. She even states when she brings Booker forward that it took everything she had. It seems extremely unlikely that she could have possibly shown Comstock and the Luteces even state that their machine showed New York being burnt down.

Man, I must have interpreted that Voxophone in the elevator wrong then. The comment about the archangel telling him to produce an heir is just odd then. Maybe just fabrication?
 
Apologies for the speed of the gif, but I thought was pretty cool.

Y8yl9Ht.gif


Of Thy Sins Shall I Wash Thee

From Sodom Shall I Lead Thee

To Thine Own Land Shall I Take Thee

In New Eden Soil Shall I Plant Thee
 
And the post credits scene...If they killed every Booker before the baptism, then who is this one? An alternate universe where there wasn't a baptism at all?

Booker in heaven! At least that's what I'm going with. If you die while Elizabeth's unavailable, you end up back in that room, behind the front door, until you come back to life. Post-credits scene is a dead Booker who no longer wants to leave the room/return to life, opting instead to stay dead and hopefully be reunited with his daughter (I am almost certainly wrong in this, but as an interpretation it works well enough for me, so I'm going with it.)

Man, I must have interpreted that Voxophone in the elevator wrong then. The comment about the archangel telling him to produce an heir is just odd then. Maybe just fabrication?

Maybe Comstock just saw a tear showing Booker and baby Anna, and assumed it was a sign instructing him to have a kid?
 
Your answers about both Slate and Archangel are pure conjecture, which for me is the main issue with the story as a follow up to BioShock. BioShock was heavily invested in making this ridiculous concept same realistic, and gave solid, reasonable and understandable answers to the players questions; questions that the player never even needed to ask because Irrational understand the kinds of question the world they build would create. We absolutely understood the fundamental way that ADAM in the first game worked; it rewrote genetic code. That answer didn't need to go any further because it was a believable, satisfactory answer for the majority of players. It gave the necessary information without weighing down the story. Vigors are not given the same explanation here at all, and their attempt to fill in the blanks within the narrative as to why only a tiny fraction of the population use them, and only two of the six or so available, is laughable. Their explanation is really left to "Oh, they haven't been tested, could be risky"? That's total horseshit, considering what we see of them in-game. Consider some of these points:

Enough time has passed in the game's story for multiple "Vigor Solutions" to be found, researched and manufactured.

The Fair we pass through at the beginning of the game shows a handful of Vigors at stands, namely the Bucking Bronco and Possession. The others are simply being advertised. This says, with the same level of conjecture as you're giving most answers, that the Possession and Bucking Bronco are new while the rest are older Vigors, a fact supported by...

The fact that several areas and several pieces of equipment within the game run on vigor technology; the Shock-Jock. The vigor must have been around and usable for a decent amount of time if it's been integrated into how Columbia works, never mind the fact that it's been considered safe enough to be displayed with other machinery in public areas. This leads me to another point...

The kind of people who would have access to and use a Vigor like Shock-Jock would have been the repairmen and lower level folk of Columbia, the exact same people who take part in the VoxPop uprising later in the game. An uprising in which they need all the manpower and firepower they can get their hands on. But you're saying the same people who have access to these useful Vigors instead think "No, a little risky. I'll just run into battle with my rifle. Don't want my Vigor to backfire on me!" And what about the people being run out of Columbia? None of them thought to stand up and fight back using an easily attainable and powerful weapon that is constantly just lying around everywhere in Columbia with the "fuel" for the this weapon literally overflowing in every location?

Which brings to the largest point demonstrated by BioShock 1, having the ability to rewrite and remake yourself was a messy subject and, in part, the ultimate downfall of Rapture. You're telling me that in a city so obsessed with race and power, and with this all bubbling under the surface, that it wouldn't play a part and would be largely ignored by the entire population on both sides of the issue?

The Vigors feel like a massive blindspot in the story, and that's the problem with this game to me; it feels like they designed the game around the location and the "tear" concept, then Ken figured out the ending and they wrote backward from there. BioShock took painstaking measures to make the world feel believable, where Columbia falls short on so many aspects of vital basic elements of how the world works. And if anyone believes that those details were "pointless" in the first game and unneeded in this, then I wish I could be in your shoes because those details were what made the first game such an incredibly immersive experience, and when those key details about how this world works, especially when you include a Multiverse, aren't explained to a satisfactory level, then the immersion and the story fall apart for me. And don't say they've been left open to interpretation because some story elements like Vigors shouldn't be left open, it's just lazy writing.

I didn't need them to explain what Vigors are all about because it is completely incidental to the story they were trying to tell. I'm not a huge fan of Sci-Fi stories that go to great lengths to try and explain how all their bullshit works. The interesting thing about Sci-i isn't the BS authors concoct to make their story "believable" its how they use the tropes and technology they have created to tell moralistic tales or Infinite's case a deeply personal tale about a man seeking redemption for his past sins. Its a fun thought experiment to try and piece together how all the multivereses fit together but at the end of the day the game is about Booker seeking redemption.
 
An assumption I had about the game leading up to release was the idea that both comstock's people and the vox wanted Elizabeth for their own plans. What ended up happening was one side wanted her and they other just wanted to kill you two because they were in the middle of a revolution and you shouldn't be there.

Kind of a bummer in retrospect. The Vox took a huge back seat.
 
RE: vigors, I don't really see any inconsistencies. The deal with vigors could very easily be as follows:

- Vigors are new in the grand scheme of things, but most people are afraid to try them, as indicated by an NPC at the start. Yes, some vigors have been on the market for a while; they found a niche among peaceful civilians, but they're not yet mainstream. It's a different culture than Rapture, where people are more socially conservative and less likely to try new things. Of course, that won't stop capitalists like Fink from trying to sell them a revolutionary new product.

(On a side note, Fink probably only needs to sell a fraction of the vigors he produces; his real moneymaker is salt, much like how companies that sell you printers for your computer are really making money off the ink cartridges.)

- In regards to Shock Jockey powering the gondola, wasn't that a simple workaround in light of power being cut to the gondola? So in other words, under normal circumstances, a citizen of Columbia wouldn't need Shock Jockey? And why would they need it for the gondola, when it's essentially public transportation to the Aerodome, not something requiring a consumer product?

- As for the dangers of vigors... It's not altogether implausible that Fink and company, looking through a tear to Rapture, not only copied the plasmid tech, allowing them to rewrite genetic code, but that they also improved upon the formula, being different minds who would bring a new touch to the engineering involved. In other words, some kinks aside, perhaps vigors aren't as innately degenerative as plasmids.
 
It happens in the real world too. Try and read on the shit that happened during the French Revolution.

I laughed when Elizabeth said that the revolution could have a happy ending like in Les' Miserables.
call lenin and fidel castro whatever you want, but their revolutions didn't just consist of "blowing up everything and murdering everyone".

my problem with both the vox populi and fitzroy is that they don't make any sense, they have a real reason to fight, yet bio infinite reduces them to psychopaths, as bad as their tormentors.

like I said, make fitzroy eventually fall from "grace" and give in to her revenge, exploiting the vox for her own selfish reasons, but make her a flawed character, with inner conflicts and contradictions, not some mindless villain.

same with comstock, he's an old guy yelling and that's about it. maybe add an audiolog in which he says he fears the elizabeth's power or that he regrets one of his many terrible actions (or at least ponders on them with sadness). something to make him a bit more human.

the antagonists in the game are barely developed at all.

Yeah. I liked the game and especially the setting, but gameplay wise this is not the step-up from Bioshock that I expected. I mean that E3 demo was on an incredible scale. I at least expected a setpiece of this magnitude, having the feeling you are actually traversing a giant city in the clouds by means of a railing system. Right now it pretty much felt like Rapture with separately themed areas capped off by loading screens. I hoped it would be more like you could traverse between areas via skyhook, in the meanwhile masking loading with a longer skyhook traversal animation. All the loading took me out of the game and sometimes killed the great immersion the game establishes. I didn't like the new Tomb Raider very much but one thing that game did right was not to break up the exploration through loading screens and mask loading in-game, thus keeping you immersed and giving more sense that the environment you are exploring is big and connected.

In the final game it pretty much felt like all the skyhook stuff was just a small circular rollercoaster ride around a combat area. Seriously missed potential in my opinion and something that I was expecting a whole lot more of based on pre-release footage.
I'm disappointed at the smaller size, but I didn't really mind the loading screens.

It's thematic. The cycle continues under a different banner.
I know, it's just very lazily developed.
 
Man, I must have interpreted that Voxophone in the elevator wrong then. The comment about the archangel telling him to produce an heir is just odd then. Maybe just fabrication?

If you assume that the "archangel" is a tear showing Comstock things then it is probably that Comstock saw the burning of new york with Old Liz at the helm and knew it was his heir taking up his mantle and doing his wishes.
 
I didn't need them to explain what Vigors are all about because it is completely incidental to the story they were trying to tell. I'm not a huge fan of Sci-Fi stories that go to great lengths to try and explain how all their bullshit works. The interesting thing about Sci-i isn't the BS authors concoct to make their story "believable" its how they use the tropes and technology they have created to tell moralistic tales or Infinite's case a deeply personal tale about a man seeking redemption for his past sins. Its a fun thought experiment to try and piece together how all the multivereses fit together but at the end of the day the game is about Booker seeking redemption.

Preach it!

And man is it fun to piece this stuff together.
 
I can maybe see your point for the Vox because overthrowing a city is a desperate move and they would be more desperate to throw caution to the wind. When you are fighting Columbia security though? Why would they take desperate measures like that. They are just the police and things escalete so quickly that they think you are just a single man and they can take you out.

I'm still waiting for someone to nit pick another plot point that wasn't adequately explained. Within the game, I am confident there is an explanation for everything.

OK, I'm still midway through my replay but another one that stands out to me; how the city actually floats. Lutece alludes to the fact that it's to do with particles being frozen under the city. Yet, the city still uses balloons. I understand that this could be to stop people freaking out; a rational explanation for the population as to how the city floats...but then why would the city actually externally act like it is floating on balloons. The "islands" fly around, float and bob like they're actually floating, but surely the particles would force them to stick to a single location, like an invisible floor beneath them? What little explanation we're given about the tears is that it acts as a window to other versions of the same world, but how would that honestly make the city float?
 
I didn't need them to explain what Vigors are all about because it is completely incidental to the story they were trying to tell. I'm not a huge fan of Sci-Fi stories that go to great lengths to try and explain how all their bullshit works. The interesting thing about Sci-i isn't the BS authors concoct to make their story "believable" its how they use the tropes and technology they have created to tell moralistic tales or Infinite's case a deeply personal tale about a man seeking redemption for his past sins. Its a fun thought experiment to try and piece together how all the multivereses fit together but at the end of the day the game is about Booker seeking redemption.

I think the issue is that people expected Ken Levine to build a cohesive and explainable setting, as he did in Bioshock and System Shock 1 & 2, where everything fits together. Vigors are an element that are not fully explained or integrated, but simply used as an attack type. I'd say that's one of the reasons why BI is more like Japanese RPGs which often contain supernatural and fantastical elements that are not fully explained but instead are fully secondary to the character drama. So does that make Bioshock Infinite the first Western JRPG-FPS?
 
I didn't need them to explain what Vigors are all about because it is completely incidental to the story they were trying to tell. I'm not a huge fan of Sci-Fi stories that go to great lengths to try and explain how all their bullshit works. The interesting thing about Sci-i isn't the BS authors concoct to make their story "believable" its how they use the tropes and technology they have created to tell moralistic tales or Infinite's case a deeply personal tale about a man seeking redemption for his past sins. Its a fun thought experiment to try and piece together how all the multivereses fit together but at the end of the day the game is about Booker seeking redemption.
Then why have any depth of plot at all? Why not make a balls to wall plot free shooter that shows Booker's redemption in the most straightforward way imaginable?
 
The subtext of the final encounter between Comstock and Booker is good stuff. One tried to kill his past but failed - you can't outrun your debts. The other drowns his future.

I didn't need them to explain what Vigors are all about because it is completely incidental to the story they were trying to tell. I'm not a huge fan of Sci-Fi stories that go to great lengths to try and explain how all their bullshit works. The interesting thing about Sci-i isn't the BS authors concoct to make their story "believable" its how they use the tropes and technology they have created to tell moralistic tales or Infinite's case a deeply personal tale about a man seeking redemption for his past sins. Its a fun thought experiment to try and piece together how all the multivereses fit together but at the end of the day the game is about Booker seeking redemption.

That's kinda how I feel--the Vigors are an in-game mechanic that doesn't have a good explanation for why they're lying around the way they are, but it's not something I'm willing to decry as being world-breaking.

An assumption I had about the game leading up to release was the idea that both comstock's people and the vox wanted Elizabeth for their own plans. What ended up happening was one side wanted her and they other just wanted to kill you two because they were in the middle of a revolution and you shouldn't be there.

Kind of a bummer in retrospect. The Vox took a huge back seat.

Eh, why would the Vox even know about her powers? As far as they're concerned she's just another facet of the ruling elite in Columbia.
 
I think the issue is that people expected Ken Levine to build a cohesive and explainable setting, as he did in Bioshock and System Shock 1 & 2, where everything fits together. Vigors are an element that are not fully explained or integrated, but simply used as an attack type. I'd say that's one of the reasons why BI is more like Japanese RPGs which often contain supernatural and fantastical elements that are not fully explained but instead are fully secondary to the character drama. So does that make Bioshock Infinite the first Western JRPG-FPS?

WJRPGFPS is my new favorite genre.
 
OK, I'm still midway through my replay but another one that stands out to me; how the city actually floats. Lutece alludes to the fact that it's to do with particles being frozen under the city. Yet, the city still uses balloons. I understand that this could be to stop people freaking out; a rational explanation for the population as to how the city floats...but then why would the city actually externally act like it is floating on balloons. The "islands" fly around, float and bob like they're actually floating, but surely the particles would force them to stick to a single location, like an invisible floor beneath them? What little explanation we're given about the tears is that it acts as a window to other versions of the same world, but how would that honestly make the city float?

Holy shit, you nitpick the oddest things. If you didn't like the particle explanation that was given in the diary plus I believe there was some info in one of the sightseer things then thats too bad. That's all you get. I don't want a game that delves into how every little thing works that is boring and a waste of time when the author is trying to tell a story with another deeper meaning.

Since we are on the topic though and since the first Bioshock seemed to satisfy your urges. How the hell was rapture built? What was that? The 40s I think? How did they get underwater and build all that. Shit, immersion broken.
 
OK, I'm still midway through my replay but another one that stands out to me; how the city actually floats. Lutece alludes to the fact that it's to do with particles being frozen under the city. Yet, the city still uses balloons. I understand that this could be to stop people freaking out; a rational explanation for the population as to how the city floats...but then why would the city actually externally act like it is floating on balloons. The "islands" fly around, float and bob like they're actually floating, but surely the particles would force them to stick to a single location, like an invisible floor beneath them? What little explanation we're given about the tears is that it acts as a window to other versions of the same world, but how would that honestly make the city float?
The balloons, jets and rotors probably steer the city -- these buildings can move around, you know. The bobbing and such could also be for show. It's kind of like, if there's a God out there, he'd sooner try to explain to people in terms of "making the world in seven days" than attempting to explain the Big Bang and evolution and other truths that would've been ahead of the science of the people at the time. Same here with quantum mechanics: You start telling the citizens of Columbia about tears to alternate realities, and who knows how their faith would change.
 
Then why have any depth of plot at all? Why not make a balls to wall plot free shooter that shows Booker's redemption in the most straightforward way imaginable?

Because they were trying to tell a deep multiverse story and not trying to explain to people how a bottle of liquid magic worked?
 
I think the issue is that people expected Ken Levine to build a cohesive and explainable setting, as he did in Bioshock and System Shock 1 & 2, where everything fits together. Vigors are an element that are not fully explained or integrated, but simply used as an attack type. I'd say that's one of the reasons why BI is more like Japanese RPGs which often contain supernatural and fantastical elements that are not fully explained but instead are fully secondary to the character drama. So does that make Bioshock Infinite the first Western JRPG-FPS?

Depends. I trought that BS was somehow more western then BI because it didnt had this Ghost Bullshit and this Twillight Zone Story. Dont say that the Story is bad at all just saying that it felt like an anime to me. Or the characterization of Liz.
 
Why do people get so defensive when people point out issues in the story or world-building of this game? Again, Far Cry 3 was GOTY last year, and there was plenty commentary about its plot flaws. Why does this game, and this series in particular, inspire so much white knighting? Is it because the tone invites a sense of reverence, of self-importance? While FC3 was open to criticism because people could easily hate on the fratty dudebro tone of that game?
 
OK, I'm still midway through my replay but another one that stands out to me; how the city actually floats. Lutece alludes to the fact that it's to do with particles being frozen under the city. Yet, the city still uses balloons. I understand that this could be to stop people freaking out; a rational explanation for the population as to how the city floats...but then why would the city actually externally act like it is floating on balloons. The "islands" fly around, float and bob like they're actually floating, but surely the particles would force them to stick to a single location, like an invisible floor beneath them? What little explanation we're given about the tears is that it acts as a window to other versions of the same world, but how would that honestly make the city float?

From what I remember, there are only a few buildings with really obvious balloons/rotors on them - plenty are just suspended. I imagine some of them bob up and down not really for any story reason, but simply as a way to show the player that the city is indeed floating.

Also, "the city isn't levitating - magicians levitate. It is simply failing to fall" is probably my favorite bullshit crazy-scientist line in all of scifi.
 
Since we are on the topic though and since the first Bioshock seemed to satisfy your urges. How the hell was rapture built? What was that? The 40s I think? How did they get underwater and build all that. Shit, immersion broken.

I guess since you didn't see or care about half the faults in Infinite's story, you missed the amount of detail the first two BioShock games went in to in the construction, maintenance and running of Rapture. I enjoyed those details. They added depth to the world. Columbia has nothing of that.
 
Man, I must have interpreted that Voxophone in the elevator wrong then. The comment about the archangel telling him to produce an heir is just odd then. Maybe just fabrication?

The archangel doesn't exist, it's propoganda for the people of Columbia that feeds into their religious beliefs. Comstock saw, in one of the Luteces tear, Columbia burning New York, drowning in flames the mountains of man. Columbia saw his 'seed' leading the assault and thus needed a child, which he couldn't conceive himself due to being rendered sterile by the Luteces machine.

EDIT: Also, I have to agree with the issues of the world building. I think the world created is magnificent but I don't think we learn nearly as much about the actual workings of various aspects of the city, in as much detail, as we do in Rapture.
 
Why do people get so defensive when people point out issues in the story or world-building of this game? Again, Far Cry 3 was GOTY last year, and there was plenty commentary about its plot flaws. Why does this game, and this series in particular, inspire so much white knighting? Is it because the tone invites a sense of reverence, of self-importance? While FC3 was open to criticism because people could easily hate on the fratty dudebro tone of that game?

Just curious because you said this earlier too. According to whom was FC3 GOTY? And tell them they have terrible taste.

As for the defense, I'm just really peeved at looking at flaws in a setting. You are already suspending your belief because we are in a working city under the ocean or a floating island. People seem to be ok brushing away how much money these endeavors would take but they absolutely need to know how it works? It's kind of silly.
 
Top Bottom