Bioshock: Infinite [no spoilers]

"When you analyse something, don't look at this aspect, because that would be closed-minded."

Isn't that the opposite of true?
 
THE OPPOSITE OF TRUE IS NOT FALSE, IT'S AN ARTIFICIAL BINARY. DECONSTRUCT IT ALL.

No, but really, I think this is silly. Either you like it, or you're waiting, or you literally dislike it. It's all allowed baby.

Can we get back to having a discussion about Bioshock: Infinite and it's actual content, folks?

I loved the notes of songbird making the variations of Elizabeth/Anna disappear, however I hit escape and quit the credits in impatience, dumb move. There's a temporal continuity error in the plot, but I suppose that's ok. Actually, it's more than OK it's sort of the point of Levine's games.
 
Bad^Hat said:
"When you analyse something, don't look at this aspect, because that would be closed-minded."

Isn't that the opposite of true?
Click to expand...
And you missed the point entirely. The point was "What does the term 'graphics' actually mean?" its an extremely broad and overused term which I feel has lost all meaning. Different people have different definitions of the word so using it is just kind of weird and unhelpful. Anyway...

BabyHeadCrab said:
however I hit escape and quit the credits in impatience, dumb move. There's a temporal continuity error in the plot, but I suppose that's ok. Actually, it's more than OK it's sort of the point of Levine's games.
Click to expand...
You missed the post-credits scene!
 
I don't think the post-credits scene is supposed to give us any new information. It just reminds us that even though Booker was drowned in the universe where he would have been baptised, there are universes where he and Anna live happily ever after... or until Booker drinks himself to death or something like that.
 
Ugh, just noticed spoilers show up plainly when you quote them. Lucky it wasn't anything revealing.

Omnomnick said:
And you missed the point entirely. The point was "What does the term 'graphics' actually mean?" its an extremely broad and overused term which I feel has lost all meaning. Different people have different definitions of the word so using it is just kind of weird and unhelpful. Anyway...
Click to expand...
Except you specifically said "don't look at graphical fidelity," which is a legitimate aspect of game design. I understand your argument, you're saying that the way in which the engine and its assets are used is more valid than how powerful or detailed they are, but he mentioned that as well and you straight up told him to ignore it. Isn't that kind of up to him?

I do see where you're coming from, though. I've always appreciated games that worked well within their graphical limitations more than games than went for technical prowess over consistent art direction. Having said that, graphical fidelity can be used to creative ends in some cases. I know its become a bit of a cliche to bring it up in gaming threads here, but Arma really benefits from being ahead of the curve technologically (by which I mean, ahead of the curve set by current-gen consoles, which isn't saying a lot) since they're aiming to create a realistic, simulated world. Perhaps not the best example as they don't have the greatest track record of optmising their games, but you see what I mean.

Oh, and I played through the first hour or two of this at a friend's. You can definitely notice the dated engine if you look hard enough, but it's still an extremely pretty game. The only thing that threw me a bit were the creepy Team America looking NPCs. Anyway, I'll probably pick it up once I have the cash because it seems rather good.
 
Edeslash said:
I don't think the post-credits scene is supposed to give us any new information. It just reminds us that even though Booker was drowned in the universe where he would have been baptised, there are universes where he and Anna live happily ever after... or until Booker drinks himself to death or something like that.
Click to expand...
I got the impression it was meant to show Booker no longer becomes Comstock in any reality, meaning he never got into debt and Elizabeth was never taken. While this removes OUR Elizabeth from all timelines, it means that Anna grows up with Booker as she always should have. I'm glad the scene exists though, it lets people put their own spin and interpretation on what it all means.
 
That is the only interpretation that allows for any kind of happy ending. Anything else and the bookend completely nullifies the rest of the game up to that point. I would have preferred they just left it tragic with everyone dead. For a bright second, I thought they had some balls.
Just want to note that his not converting into Comstock does not necessitate him NOT getting into debt.
 
Omnomnick said:
I got the impression it was meant to show Booker no longer becomes Comstock in any reality, meaning he never got into debt and Elizabeth was never taken. While this removes OUR Elizabeth from all timelines, it means that Anna grows up with Booker as she always should have. I'm glad the scene exists though, it lets people put their own spin and interpretation on what it all means.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know that's probably how the writers meant for it to be interpreted. However, it's nonsense.
The Elisabeth/Lucett plan to stop All versions of Comstock from ever existing would not work. All they did at the end is kill yet another version of Dewitt. The only way that plan would have worked is if there was some sort of "PRIME" universe where the array of variables containing Comstock came from. Then they would've had to find said prime universe and kill Dewitt/Comstock there at the time of the baptism.

But then again I reject the writer's interpretation of how the multiverse would work.
Ideas I find preposterous:
-The inter dimensional mother ghost thing
-People going insane and being slightly out of phase, just because I killed their doppelganger in another universe.
-The idea that events in one universe can influence events in another universe.
 
'Heads, or Tails", "Head... or Tails?"

Attention to detail moment, there's already a dozen strikes for heads. Each time the loop completes another heads is logged by Letuce.
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
'Heads, or Tails", "Head... or Tails?"

Attention to detail moment, there's already a dozen strikes for heads. Each time the loop completes another heads is logged by Letuce.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you should take a look at his back...
 
2rQtB
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
'Heads, or Tails", "Head... or Tails?"

Attention to detail moment, there's already a dozen strikes for heads. Each time the loop completes another heads is logged by Letuce.
Click to expand...

What loop?
 
Remus said:
What loop?
Click to expand...

The Luteces have repeated the whole thing at least a hundred times, as shown in the pic I posted above. Every time Songbird stops Booker, as Elizabeth says when they're looking at New York getting Columbia'd. When young Liz gets the CAGE note, they're finally able to get past Songbird.
 
also his utter inability to draw a ball that isn't number 77, despite receiving the notice (which is silly to begin with, but it's Letuce, so it works), which of course results in him being revealed as the "false shepherd" every time the loop repeats itself, along with countless other hints if you replay the game, it's pretty fun the second time.

Wow, someone found audio of Songbird's death in Bioshock. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qpmvkZ6TIMk#t=13s[/spoiler]
 
Edeslash said:
The Luteces have repeated the whole thing at least a hundred times, as shown in the pic I posted above. Every time Songbird stops Booker, as Elizabeth says when they're looking at New York getting Columbia'd. When young Liz gets the CAGE note, they're finally able to get past Songbird.
Click to expand...

I see, and why exactly didn't Elisabeth from the future give the CAGE code to her younger self in any of the other previous tries?

Also come to think of it why aren't the Lucettes themselves insane/out of phase like all those other people?
The version of the Leucettes that helped Comstock were murdered by Fink on Comstock's order, because they had outlived their usefulness. So the version of the Leucettes that we encounter in the game, doing a G-Man impression all over the place, are actually an alternate version of them, that also have the memories of the murdered versions. So why aren't they insane again?
 
Let's get one thing straight, Letuce is one person, the couple thing is a kind of adorable game he or she plays, it's all quite strange and lovely.
 
Yes, I know. They are a male and female version of the same person.
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
Wow, someone found audio of Songbird's death in Bioshock. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qpmvkZ6TIMk#t=13s
Click to expand...

Uhh... I don't get it. JESUS

also,

The whole thing about people going insane when their doppelganger is killed is really confusing. Aren't there supposed to be countless universes where a person dies for any random reasons? Shouldn't everyone be insane? Nobody can be completely protected from death.

Or does it only work with interdimensional travel, when someone sees a person he has seen dead in another universe? Or something like that.
 
It might be coincidence and reuse of a sound effect, but it fcking works, especially considering Fitzpatrick is wearing a bird mask, though Irrational claims infinite development didn't begin until 2K's other studios finished Bioshock 2. Even so, my nose is bleeding, help.
 
BabyHeadCrab said:
though Irrational claims infinite development didn't begin until 2K's other studios finished Bioshock 2.
Click to expand...

I've heard the opposite. I think someone asked on Twitter if Levine had worked on Bioshock 2 and he replied that they were working on Infinite back then.

How the hell does someone even find something like that? I had to listen to it 10 times before I heard it.
 
Edeslash said:
I've heard the opposite. I think someone asked on Twitter if Levine had worked on Bioshock 2 and he replied that they were working on Infinite back then.

How the hell does someone even find something like that? I had to listen to it 10 times before I heard it.
Click to expand...

Then it could very well fit, which is rather chilling. :O

As for finding it... not sure, check out www.reddit.com/r/bioshock - but don't tell anyone here, reddit is totally lame etc etc also, might want to refresh it a few times because they just finished maintenance. It's actually a pretty awesome subreddit sans a few bad jokes
 
Warning: This is now the most spoiler'y post on this thread. Even if you've completed the game you may want to save some of this for a second playthrough. That being said, check out my second spoiler tag for five awesomely helpful charts.

There's also a great megathread on SA with all the spoilertastic analysis (70 pages and counting) you could ever want, skip to the middle of the thread and read from there if you take the plunge. Link below.

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3539522
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3539522[/spoiler]

Below are various flowcharts explaining the temporal issues in Bioshock: Infinite. Bear in mind there's also an e-book I should read that Amazon gave me. But check this shit out, people are getting really into "solving" the Bioshock continuity rhythm, reminds of all the Half-Life speculation.

u6ZVn0D.png


8X1CQZv.jpg

xmUAykJ.jpg

qhOVPMM.jpg

UC56IPm.png


http://bioshock.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Known_Issues_and_Contradictions_in_Bioshock_Infinite's_Plot
 
"Did she kill all the versions that would have been baptized or just this version. It's left up to interpretation."

Yeah well, in my interpretation the Elisabeths only killed the player character of Booker Dewitt, and all the other trillions of versions of Comstock are doing just fine and dandy. Meaning, that all the events of the game were pointless...
 
Yeah, I edited the post several times. There's a little bit of conflict into some events that leave the player's imagination going. Check out the breakdowns (particularly the last spoiler tab) on my last post.

There's also a Novel and an e-book I want to read but I'm not sure I have the time to go that deep. Or high. HAH! I'll see myself out.
 
...and if you were wondering, yes, I'm taking this April Fools day very seriously.
 
Remus said:
"Did she kill all the versions that would have been baptized or just this version. It's left up to interpretation."

Yeah well, in my interpretation the Elisabeths only killed the player character of Booker Dewitt, and all the other trillions of versions of Comstock are doing just fine and dandy. Meaning, that all the events of the game were pointless...
Click to expand...

That interpretation does not take into account the infinity-sight of Elizabeth. She sees through all the doors and takes the actions needed to achieve the desired result.
 
I'll keep editing my biggie post with information sources and outlines/graphs. I'm having too much fun finding and reading this sht. My mind exploded reading the last graph on my second spoiler tag. I don't even know who I am anymore.
 
For those of you trying to put together hard structured timelines, consider the choice between the bird and the cage, and furthermore, consider the thaumatrope:


The bird doesn't give the whole truth. Neither does the cage. Sometimes you have to look into the illusion, into mystery, to induce the truth.

ADMIN NOTE: Spoiler tags next time please.
 
Now that is just awesome. That being said, I can't imagine why anyone would pick the cage, regardless of the Thaumatrope, because they're presented to you as being somehow diametrically opposed to one another - which was odd to begin with...

MFL please spoiler tag the decision between cage and bird
 
I take it as meaning that underneath the choice the cage still exists, in very much the same way that the unseen potentialities still haven't been accounted for. More so, that while the moral choices in the game are there to be taken, so are subjectively important insomuch as one establishes such personal standards, they do not contribute to the overall objective end state (e.g. they do not give multiple endings, ala Bioshock 1).
 
Try to be more liberal on the spoiler tags, but I definitely agree. I love that the choices reveal narrative elements and are largely there to force players to examine what Booker is thinking.
 
I can understand picking the cage because the bird is a dead bird. But looks like most people, including myself, picked the bird.
 
Personally I picked based on what they symbolize to me.

The bird cage symbolizes imprisonment, slavery, etc.
The bird symbolizes freedom.

And since most people picked the bird, my guess would be that they were thinking the same.
 
Remus said:
Personally I picked based on what they symbolize to me.

The bird cage symbolizes imprisonment, slavery, etc.
The bird symbolizes freedom.

And since most people picked the bird, my guess would be that they were thinking the same.
Click to expand...

precisely, but they're depicting the trope in the game of
slavery or death
It seems a bit lose lose.
 
http://www48.zippyshare.com/v/86889811/file.html

Download of the OST. Untagged 320kbps mp3 files. They say they're not planning to sell it separately at all.

It's even got the piano melody that plays when you ascend to Columbia, after the voice says "Hallelujah". THAT was one of the greatest moments for me. That little song makes it so perfect.
Edit: Oh man, I just tried speeding it up. It sounds like a part of Will The Circle Be Unbroken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Edeslash
Bioshock Infinite Release date announced: March 26th 2013
Replies
24
Views
3K
Shem
Shem
Edeslash
'1999 Mode' announced for Bioshock Infinite
Replies
35
Views
3K
Maestro
Maestro
Back
Top