Keyser Soze
Member
I never read reviews, and knew there would be a twist / reveal of some sort..
It is Bioshock for god sake
SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion
- Thread starter thomasmahler
- Start date
I never read reviews, and knew there would be a twist / reveal of some sort..
It is Bioshock for god sake
Tummi Gummi
Member
I don't think anyone was holding up FC3 as "revolutionary" or "driving the genre forward" at all, let alone on the strength of its writing. So obviously arguments about narrative are going to be more contentious in this case.
What was the big twist in the game? The only twists I can think of involve all of those pertaining to the ending, was there a mid-game twist?
Miles Quaritch
Member
"Do not burden Columbia with your chaff." Very BS1 in tone and general theme. I also remember how sure everyone was that was Andrew Ryan in the balcony.
No one cares about the second Bioshock game, Ken Levine didn't want to claim it as his bastard child so neither shall I. Anyway, you still didn't answer my question. How did they build rapture in the first place. You don't need to explain it all, you can feel free to point me to something that explains it if you'd like. I'll wait. In the mean time, you can also tell me about all of the faults in Infinite's storyline.
They can be, it only needs to make you think and bring up discussion to be deep. I'm seeing plenty of discussion, friend.
Tummi Gummi
Member
Like someone else said, I would've been more surprised (perhaps pleasantly) if there wasn't a twist.
The game really changed a lot during its development. Last E3 there were gameplay trailers were Liz was a lot more active during battles, using his powers to open tears and use them as help. But they basically removed that.
It is sad, because the idea was incredibly good, could create more interesting battles and would definitelly get togheter narrative and gameplay, but it looks it was too hard to implement.
José Mourinho
cocknose
People can think and bring up discussion over deep philosophical content. They can also think and bring up discussion over convoluted story lines that make zero sense. Now I'm not saying BI makes zero sense. I'm simply pointing out that that thinking and discussion after the fact doesn't equate to depth.
Keyser Soze
Member
I would still expect something.
If Ken Levine's next game is an iOS game in the Runner genre I will stick expect a twist/reveal.
I currently expect all three DLCs to have twists.
XANDER CAGE
Member
I actually appreciate the fact that, unlike the original Bioshock, it's a lot harder to explain any "twist" with one sentence. Like, you could tell someone "Booker is Comstock," but that actually doesn't really say much.
Apophenia Overload
Member
They won Best Technical at GDC this past week. There was a lot of buzz for FC3 as GOTY 2013 elsewhere in December and January; it was at least on the short list for many gaming journalism outlets. It might not have been GOTY for everyone, but enough people talked about it as it was a contender.
What's it to you if people aren't as satisfied with the premises a piece of fiction gives out, and what to question and challenge it? Also; believability is not the same as realism: http://www.felonius.com/2010/07/literature/realism-vs-believability-in-fiction-and-fantasy/
When someone is building a fictional world, there are different limit to suspension of believability. Incidentally, that's why so many time travel stories are unconvincing, because they don't set good rules for such a mindtwisting mechanic, and end up breaking those rules themselves. Though in the case of BI most of the setting complaints are about non-time travel/multiverse mechanics.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
There is a drawing by a police officer too early in the game that gives it away, but I thought the thing about Comstock being sterile kind of worked to confuse the player a bit until you get more voxaphones. I fact, I believe that not getting any voxaphones at all would have made it more obvious.
Looking at the trailer back then it looked like they werent going down the dimension storyline but just "Rapture in the Sky". Along with what I was saying eariler how much emphasis is on America as a religion. Kind of wish He stayed with that topic because columbia itself felt like it was too mixed in what it stood for.
You can keep a building from falling, and the suspended particles do just that. But in Columbia, they still need to move the buildings around. You see it at the start of the game, and you see countless docking points that say "Mind the gap." The buildings don't fall because they're supported by suspended particles, BUT they can still be moved if propulsive force is exerted on them -- hence the rotors, jets, or even bobbing from balloons. These steer the buildings around, allowing them to connect and reconnect in any number of configurations.
Columbia was Comstock's "New Eden." That's all there is to it. Everything Comstock did, he did to preserve the future of a place he felt was "right" in a world full of "wrongs." This is the end result of his religious zeal. Adam Ryan did the same thing with Rapture, only Ryan never made any pretenses about the fact his god was power and money.
José Mourinho
cocknose
A lot of people have mentioned this painting. Maybe it's just me, but the painting looks like neither Comstock or Booker?
People don't discuss something for weeks or months over something that made no sense. I promise this will still be discussed on here for a long time to come (similar to how Spec Ops comes up so often.)
Tummi Gummi
Member
Definitely. "Lots of speculations for everyone!!!!!!" does not instantly denote quality or sophistication. The LoK series - which also revolves around time-travel and alternate realities - involved multiple teams over several years and necessitated a considerable amount of retcon-ing, yet the end result was extremely tightly written, and the only real disagreement amongst fans involves minor sideplots. There wasn't a flood of people coming in after Defiance going "BUT WHAT DID THE ENDING MEAN???" (ironically, the ending was indeed cut short due to time limitations). But as the above says, I'm not saying that deliberately inciting speculation and differing interpretations means something was badly written.
So I didn't really like the twist. In fact I think it just sort of ruined the story for me.
The problem is I am having a hard time articulating *why* exactly. I am getting a bummed out feeling from the story (and not because it was emotional or anything). I am just feeling like I got cheated out of something better, though. I've been talking with my girlfriend about this and trying to pin down why exactly I'm having negative feelings towards the game (and I really didn't like the direction it took towards the end) so I ended up coming with a few ideas-- I should not she thought it was pretty "blegh" as well.
I'll just preface by saying this isn't going to be articulated well because I'm still not exactly sure *how* to explain myself but I'll just say things and hope you guys understand.
I don't much care for 'time travel' plots in general. This is usually because instead of restraining themselves they go *all out* and Infinite went *really* all out. Elizabeth basically became the divine god of space time and could undo anything she wanted to and it bummed me the hell out because of how big the scale got. I'm going to say I really really was into the story up until the full reveal and all the lighthouse shit. This would probably garner a response similar to "well you probably could see it coming in terms of the time stuff going all out". I guess I did, sort of. Earlier with Elizabeth hopping timelines, it was at least tame enough for me to swallow, I suppose, and I was just sort of swept up in the pacing, but looking back I probably should have prepared myself for the worst. Well I didn't and I did get burned by the ending. So it's partly that the whole scale of the matter was irritating to me. Elizabeth going time lord on the story was a bit of a bummer (and subsequently being able to solve all problems ever).
My girlfriend brought up a point as well to me that I think fits into my dislike of the story. 'It all wraps up too neatly', to paraphrase. All the conflicts, all the character development, all the strings and whatnot are tied right into the time travel stuff. I get this feeling that I was sort of cheated out (as I mentioned earlier) and given a hand I'm not pleased with. I liked Booker's internal struggle with his loss of Anna, I liked crazy white supremacist Comstock and Elizabeth trying to break ties from him, I liked the twins a lot, I liked Fitzroy a lot. But it all just seems to tie right into itself with the time stuff. Anna is now Elizabeth, Booker is Comstock, and Fitzroy's stuff just seems to be tossed aside because they happen to be in a timeline where Booker already died? Or something like that. I felt the circumstances behind Fitzroy's death were undeserving of her want to kill Booker and it felt a bit hamfisted and sudden to me.
I didn't mind the twins so much. They were quirky enough and explained briefly enough for me to really enjoy. However it's everything else that bothers me a lot. The actual character struggles and developments are still there and are still interesting, but the context and the motives behind them all just sour the whole thing for me. At least this is how I'm interpreting my thoughts about it.
And in general, I'm just not a big fan of time travel/parallel universe cliches and tropes. This is probably the last influence, at least my girlfriend has helped me deduce. This probably is going to be similar to everything I just said, but I guess it's because it all ties into a general dislike of the parallel universe stuff. Maybe because it's just done so similarly in the same way each time, maybe it's because it always comes down to a "go back to the past and undo everything that has gone wrong" path, but I just didn't like the way they handled the time stuff. I didn't like walking through the infinite lighthouse probability space place. I didn't like how the time stuff was the crux of the story and how integral it ended up being. Blah. I'm just repeating myself at this point.
I'm just really offput by it all. I'm not a big fan of "WHAT A TWEEST!" stuff and both Bioshock 1 and Infinite give me that same feeling (and Catherine and Deadly Premonition) where I just feel cheated out of all the good character stuff that was going on prior. I don't know how else to explain it but if anyone could help me articulate my thoughts a bit better, it'd be highly appreciated. Bioshock 2 is still my favorite of the three (mostly because it doesn't do any of this and has, to me, a cohesive and consistently strong narrative). I hate being the downer at a party but, again, I really just wanted to get my opinion out because I've been itching to tell people.
The problem is I am having a hard time articulating *why* exactly. I am getting a bummed out feeling from the story (and not because it was emotional or anything). I am just feeling like I got cheated out of something better, though. I've been talking with my girlfriend about this and trying to pin down why exactly I'm having negative feelings towards the game (and I really didn't like the direction it took towards the end) so I ended up coming with a few ideas-- I should not she thought it was pretty "blegh" as well.
I'll just preface by saying this isn't going to be articulated well because I'm still not exactly sure *how* to explain myself but I'll just say things and hope you guys understand.
I don't much care for 'time travel' plots in general. This is usually because instead of restraining themselves they go *all out* and Infinite went *really* all out. Elizabeth basically became the divine god of space time and could undo anything she wanted to and it bummed me the hell out because of how big the scale got. I'm going to say I really really was into the story up until the full reveal and all the lighthouse shit. This would probably garner a response similar to "well you probably could see it coming in terms of the time stuff going all out". I guess I did, sort of. Earlier with Elizabeth hopping timelines, it was at least tame enough for me to swallow, I suppose, and I was just sort of swept up in the pacing, but looking back I probably should have prepared myself for the worst. Well I didn't and I did get burned by the ending. So it's partly that the whole scale of the matter was irritating to me. Elizabeth going time lord on the story was a bit of a bummer (and subsequently being able to solve all problems ever).
My girlfriend brought up a point as well to me that I think fits into my dislike of the story. 'It all wraps up too neatly', to paraphrase. All the conflicts, all the character development, all the strings and whatnot are tied right into the time travel stuff. I get this feeling that I was sort of cheated out (as I mentioned earlier) and given a hand I'm not pleased with. I liked Booker's internal struggle with his loss of Anna, I liked crazy white supremacist Comstock and Elizabeth trying to break ties from him, I liked the twins a lot, I liked Fitzroy a lot. But it all just seems to tie right into itself with the time stuff. Anna is now Elizabeth, Booker is Comstock, and Fitzroy's stuff just seems to be tossed aside because they happen to be in a timeline where Booker already died? Or something like that. I felt the circumstances behind Fitzroy's death were undeserving of her want to kill Booker and it felt a bit hamfisted and sudden to me.
I didn't mind the twins so much. They were quirky enough and explained briefly enough for me to really enjoy. However it's everything else that bothers me a lot. The actual character struggles and developments are still there and are still interesting, but the context and the motives behind them all just sour the whole thing for me. At least this is how I'm interpreting my thoughts about it.
And in general, I'm just not a big fan of time travel/parallel universe cliches and tropes. This is probably the last influence, at least my girlfriend has helped me deduce. This probably is going to be similar to everything I just said, but I guess it's because it all ties into a general dislike of the parallel universe stuff. Maybe because it's just done so similarly in the same way each time, maybe it's because it always comes down to a "go back to the past and undo everything that has gone wrong" path, but I just didn't like the way they handled the time stuff. I didn't like walking through the infinite lighthouse probability space place. I didn't like how the time stuff was the crux of the story and how integral it ended up being. Blah. I'm just repeating myself at this point.
I'm just really offput by it all. I'm not a big fan of "WHAT A TWEEST!" stuff and both Bioshock 1 and Infinite give me that same feeling (and Catherine and Deadly Premonition) where I just feel cheated out of all the good character stuff that was going on prior. I don't know how else to explain it but if anyone could help me articulate my thoughts a bit better, it'd be highly appreciated. Bioshock 2 is still my favorite of the three (mostly because it doesn't do any of this and has, to me, a cohesive and consistently strong narrative). I hate being the downer at a party but, again, I really just wanted to get my opinion out because I've been itching to tell people.
whatevermort
Member
Well, yeah. Crucially, booker doesn't have a beard.
Tummi Gummi
Member
That's a fair point. "Booker is Comstock" has a lot of baggage.
I guess this phrase goes a long way when you also point out the fact that Bioshock 2 wasn't made by the same team.
Edit: And to each their own, of course. It just seems like these aren't your type of story, no shame there.
José Mourinho
cocknose
Yeah, but quite a number of people have said that the painting give it away. What I'm struggling with is how anybody looked at the painting and could see any resemblance of Comstock at all. I looked over it on my second play through and honestly, it could be anybody.
I think that's the key, though. Levine (at least with 1 and Infinite) seems to hinge so much on a twist of some sort and 2 *didn't*. Two doesn't have a big "A-HA!" pull the rug from under you moment. Yes it has the perspective switch at one point but I never got the feeling like everything I've been working for was completely false.
XANDER CAGE
Member
I think people mean the 2011 demo, which features a painting of Comstock that basically looks like 2013's Booker with slicked-back hair.
Jacksonlee
Member
lol, before i finished the game, someone wrote that somewhere - and i began to think.
how the hell is Booker comstock?
and brushed it off as trolling.
needs context.
Tummi Gummi
Member
I honestly thought that guy looked more weaselly and slight compared to standard Booker.
What some of you see as a flaw, I see as a positive thing. I like this kind of story. So it boils down to opinion, not good or bad choices by Irrational. I like having to imagine myself how Columbia was built. You, as a player and not a character, don't always need to know how things have began. Many praise The Walking Dead (and with good reason) and on that you don't know how everything started. You just deal with how the world have become then.
XANDER CAGE
Member
He's a little more gaunt, but it was definitely a wise choice for them to age Comstock up.
José Mourinho
cocknose
Perhaps some did. But the post I'm thinking of, which I was only reminded of because of another post somebody made earlier, stated that it was the police officers painting in that room that give it away, and a few other agreed.
To be fair, Booker isn't LITERALLY Comstock. He's a version of him that made several key decisions that led him down a different path.
I was under the impression the painting was intended to either be a "younger" profile of Comstock or Comstock before he was redesigned by Irrational.
You can still see the resemblance, it's just not obvious upon a first glance.
I was under the impression the painting was intended to either be a "younger" profile of Comstock or Comstock before he was redesigned by Irrational.
You can still see the resemblance, it's just not obvious upon a first glance.
The One Who Knocks
Member
I'm note sure if it's a joke due to the spelling which may suggest it's satrical in nature but in the event that it's not, when somebody crosses into another universe two things happen, the first is that they remember everything the other version of themselves did up to the point that they cross over. However, memories already exist in these locations. As a result, the memories conflict with one another and lead to both sets of memories becoming corrupted, suppressed, and or erased. Secondly, when one crosses over, to fill in the gaps left from this conflict, memories are created around important events. When somebody tries to remember something from before they crossed over an incredibly powerful cognitive dissonance occurs resulting in physical reactions, because different memories are conflicting with each other.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Doesn't the description/painting randomize a bit? I've seen screenshots that look more like an Andrew Ryan cameo, and also ones where he's fully bearded.
Does every Booker go to the baptism was that established as a 'constant'? It seems to me that only Bookers that go to the baptism can become Comstocks so if a Booker didn't wind up there then he didn't die.
Here's my question though, when booker first talks to Comstock his nose bleeds. Why?
Yeah I just did a playthrough where it looked just like Andrew Ryan.
I can see your point, but as you say, it's purely opinion. The Walking Dead was a character drama. BioShock's main character was arguably the city itself; how it was built and why, and subsequently what happened to it. The whole BioShock 1 to Infinite tonal shift reminds me of the RedLetterMedia guys talking about Star Wars vs Star Trek; Star Trek is like Science-Fact in that everything is grounded in some sort of explanation where as Star Wars is true Science-Fiction, it doesn't matter how the X-Wing flies, it just does because the point of Star Wars is the characters. To me, BioShock 1 feels like Science-Fact and Infinite feels like Science-Fiction to me, and I think that my main gripe is that I far prefared the former and don't like the shifting direction they've taken. That's just my opinion though, I get why other people wouldn't like that. But don't say there aren't faults in the story because there are, you're just not all invested in that aspect of the story.
I heard people on /v/ would keep saying "Elizabeth kills you at the end." because they are trolls and dicks, yet getting spoiled by that wouldn't have been so bad, because you really have to know the context to get it.
In short, it's what happens to people in Infinite's universe when accosted with a "paradox."
It's the brain's way of trying to make sense of a lot of contradictions between universes, which Booker's did with the "Bring us the girl and wipe away the debt" impetus at the beginning of the game.
Up until that point, Booker had repressed all of the conflicting memories and was focused solely on the task at hand. When Comstock started talking to him, some of those memories came out and some cognitive dissonance occured which caused the physical reaction. I think at that point, when Comstock mentions Anna, Booker's mind flips because then he isn't so sure whether he has a child or not.
Yeah, I think that Lutece quote at the beginning of the game indicates that person naturally feels like they are normally part of the dimension they are in. They also assume memories of the person they are in their new dimiension and as The One Who Knocks said, when memories from an old dimiension and new one conflict....noz bleed.
Just noticed your edit. I forgot to make this point in my initial post but yah this is something I really should mention otherwise I feel like a dick.
By no means am I saying this story is just terrible or crap or the writing is bad. Hell, I'd say it's a compliment to mention that it wraps up so neatly being a story involving parallel universes and time travel. It's just not my cup of tea and it just bums me out because I *was* enjoying it quite strongly up until the time travel stuff revealed its full hand.
This game is just going to be this year's Catherine (and Deadly Premonition) to me. A game whose story I got really wrapped up in that soured me very greatly in the last 5 minutes/closing act/etc.
Tummi Gummi
Member
I stopped reading /v/ as soon as the ps3 version leaked for that very reason. Although I was informed multiple times that Comstock was a robot and Elizabeth is murdered by clone-Booker via QTE and dumped in the sea
Right.
The context is arguably nebulous.
We could argue that Elizabeth is "killing" the Booker that serves as the divergence to the recursive loop that is the events that unfold in BioShock Infinite. The scene after the credits seems to imply that Booker and Anna have precluded these events.
So while one can say "BOOKER IS COMSTOCK" and "BOOKER IS KILLED BY ELIZABETH," neither capture the breadth of actually experiencing these things in the game.
I don't remember Comstock mentioning anna, all I remember him saying is "itll end in blood, but then again, it always does with you, doesn't it?" Which I guess could be a pointed reference to something Booker is supposed to remember, most likely Anna but it seems rather oblique and could just as easily be referring to wounded knee which I don't think Booker had any problem with remembering.
A more meta troll would have been Elizabeth kills herself ;0.
XANDER CAGE
Member
I suppose quantum dimension stuff is a step closer to complete fantasy, but there's a lot of stuff in the original Bioshock that requires almost the same amount of disbelief suspension. How can genetic modification be achieved via syringe? I don't know, doesn't really matter. How does said genetic engineering allow people to shoot fire and bees out of their hand? Again, not really the point. How was Rapture actually built? We get some vague details - a shell corporation funelled money and materials - but we're never told how exactly it was constructed. None of these details are important to the core story, and are handwaved well enough to provide some juicy storytelling opportunities.
To be honest, the only thing that makes Bioshock less fantastical than Infinite is a lack of dimension-hopping, which is sort of the final frontier of bonkers I guess.
Interesting thoughts. I can tell you're still sorting through your feelings about the story. I really liked the story. It's rare I feel this way about something that involves tampering with the space-time continuum. I'll briefly try to pin down why I feel they executed it "just right" in BioShock Infinite.
First, Elizabeth. Most of her was in one reality... but part of her was, literally, in another. If the whole of her self was divided between two realities... I can buy that she might be able to comprehend the "void" in-between, visually depicted here as a sea of doors. Of coure, she isn't able to do this until the siphon that was regulating her power is destroyed. But once she is "off the leash," as one recording puts it, her connection goes from 5% to 100%, and she can see all of the probable outcomes.
What makes this whole premise so dramatic, and so rich, is how it allows us to see all sides of Booker, the true star of the show (contrary to some who said it was Elizabeth). You come to appreciate him in a way we rarely do with other characters that operate in strictly one timeline, with strictly one set of outcomes.
You gain one understanding of Booker when you see how he deals with living with the weight of past atrocities, becoming an alcoholic in debt for gambling, to the point he sells off his daughter, something he immediately regrets. He is not hiding from what he did wrong; he is tortured by it, and it is changing him so that he hates himself for the cruel racist he was. This is one side of the human psyche: depression.
You gain another understanding of Booker when you see what happens when he comes to Jesus and uses religion as a way to not only excuse his past actions, but to empower him to do more of the same. He doesn't learn from his past mistakes, and only becomes more bigoted, more self-righteous. He is baptised and reborn as Comstock, and his newfound ideals help him justify his cruelty. This is the other side of the human psyche: rationalization.
Booker goes from being a tortured, cynical action hero to a well-rounded take on the tragedy and redemption of man. Not just in terms of how he treats others or himself, mind you, but even what he accomplishes -- a working class hero in one timeline, a religious zealot who created a flying city in another; a man who has lost it all, and a man who has everything. All diverging from a baptism after the atrocities he committed at Wounded Knee, and his indecision whether to seek absolution this way, or his belief whether he could be absolved at all.
In this respect, I thought the space-time stuff was a great framework for exploring what is essentially the tale of a man finding redemption.
I could have sworn he mentioned Anna during that speech (in a round about way which made me believe Anna was his wife not a child) and I only say that because this was the first time Booker was seeing the man who could make prophecies first hand and using the name Anna would be about as big of a "yeah I know my shit" as Comstock could do.
Edit: Ah here you go, 47 seconds in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6qoupOSBak
As a matter of fact, I'm very insterested in the story and writing in general. The thing is that I'm interpreting things in a different way. Again, as we agree, opinions. For starters, I don't agree that Columbia is the main character. For me, it's Liz. Rapture was the main character for BioShock 1, but what drives Columbia along the way is Liz. Also, what you may see as flaw because of some answers missing, I see as "you can figure that out on your own", which I very much like. That's one of the main reasons that Twin Peaks is my favorite show. That being said, I don't think the story is perfect because, frankly, none of them are.
Oh, just so we're clear, I don't think Columbia is the main character of Infinite. Rapture was for 1 but they've shifted with this. That's what I meant by saying I didn't like the tonal shift. But yeah, I agree with you on everything else. It just boils down to opinions.
Similar threads
- Poll