You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 11, 2016, 02:06:09 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: bioshock infinite  (Read 2439 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline animationprincessofOooTopic starter

bioshock infinite
« on: July 20, 2013, 03:15:13 PM »
Has anyone played this amazing game and also what did you guys think of the ending?

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2013, 03:27:04 PM »
Enjoy it a lot.

Thought perhaps some of mechanics were in service to the Bioshock brand-name instead of Bioshock Infinite itself.

Like the ending, and thought it was really well done, but I kind of saw it coming in a broad sense.

Hate 1999 mode because it's just stupid.

Offline animationprincessofOooTopic starter

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2013, 04:01:49 PM »
Enjoy it a lot.

Thought perhaps some of mechanics were in service to the Bioshock brand-name instead of Bioshock Infinite itself.

Like the ending, and thought it was really well done, but I kind of saw it coming in a broad sense.

Hate 1999 mode because it's just stupid.

  I cried on the ending.. then again I cried at the ending of the walking dead game. I honestly didn't see the ending coming. Also aren't Handymen a bitch? What's your favorite Vigor to use?

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2013, 04:31:41 PM »
In general I liked the bucking bronco vigor. Knock some guys up and pop them with a carbine.

For handymen I liked shock jocky for the stun and trap powers.

Honestly though, I didn't like the vigors as a concept. They're just a cut-and-paste of plasmids. It didn't really mesh. They're ubiquitous enough to be used in carnival games and given away as free samples, but no citizens are using them? There's some serious disconnect for me.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2013, 04:44:35 PM »
Am I like the only person who saw the 'twist' coming?  Not to mention that the game felt very much like a Call of Duty style of shooter.  You have an arena, you clear it, move on to the next, lather rinse repeat.  The gratuitous violence didn't help mask that for me.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2013, 04:48:32 PM »
Am I like the only person who saw the 'twist' coming?  Not to mention that the game felt very much like a Call of Duty style of shooter.  You have an arena, you clear it, move on to the next, lather rinse repeat.  The gratuitous violence didn't help mask that for me.
I sort of saw it coming, but I think I was suppressing it so I could enjoy the game. Yeah, I agree. I think the gun-play portion was more in service to, "That's how we did it in the original Bioshock, and that's how you have to do this one." kind of thing.

In fact, some of the funnest gun play was when you were on the skylines.

Also, scavenging was another one of those issues

Offline Chris Brady

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2013, 05:06:09 PM »
Don't get me wrong, it was a good game.  But I personally don't think it's worth the 'game of the year' spooging people have been doing over it.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2013, 05:15:12 PM »
Don't get me wrong, it was a good game.  But I personally don't think it's worth the 'game of the year' spooging people have been doing over it.
Yeah, I just think so much of it was done because, "X means Bioshock".

I thought the characters were great. It's a pretty darn good game by my reckoning, and while it might be in the running for GotY... well... the year's still young and a lot of stuff could easily take it out of the running.

Offline animationprincessofOooTopic starter

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2013, 06:00:17 PM »
Well I'd give it Game Of The Year   :-[  then again I was so into the story and each character much less the world felt so real. I hated going to Shantytown. Reading all those signs like "Daughter sick we need a doctor please." Made it all the more clear how evil Jeremiah Fink was. The only thing I didn't get was why Booker who was tramatized at Wounded Knee became such a racist as Comstock. Also I think if Elizabeth/Anna would have gone back before he joined the Army instead of drowning him shot him in the foot or something could have stopped the whole thing and Booker would still be alive.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2013, 06:15:27 PM »
The ending is...  Something I won't talk about.  Ever.  Suffice it to say, that it was a complete let down to me.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2013, 06:37:12 PM »
Well I'd give it Game Of The Year   :-[  then again I was so into the story and each character much less the world felt so real. I hated going to Shantytown. Reading all those signs like "Daughter sick we need a doctor please." Made it all the more clear how evil Jeremiah Fink was. The only thing I didn't get was why Booker who was tramatized at Wounded Knee became such a racist as Comstock. Also I think if Elizabeth/Anna would have gone back before he joined the Army instead of drowning him shot him in the foot or something could have stopped the whole thing and Booker would still be alive.

Spoilered Just in Case
Booker still is alive and has his daughter. Did you watch the ending scene after the credits? Schrodinger's Cat is in full effect (probably the best example I've ever seen used besides the original theory).

Offline Shjade

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2013, 09:32:31 PM »
Suffice it to say everything from here on in the thread is likely to be spoilers. It'll be silly having a whole thread in spoiler boxes, particularly when the first post in the thread directly asks people what they thought of the ending.

On the whole, I thought the game was okay. Gameplay was still that sorta iffy handling that comes from an FPS being developed for both console and PC and ends up feeling clunky by comparison to something specific to the one or the other and thereby has better handling (usually, at least). It felt like Bioshock 1, in other words, which isn't really a compliment. The environments were great, though. I liked Columbia's aesthetic a lot more than Rapture's, the various conversations and interactions between NPCs that you could observe really helped flesh out the place, even if the copy-paste faces had a distinct Uncanny Valley effect within the first two blocks of entering the city.

But the story?

Hhh.

Okay. Look. Elizabeth is fabulous (with some exceptions: I'm looking at you "obviously not updated for the current story's mood" lockpick messages) to the point where I found myself sometimes stopping at points of peace between gunfights just to watch her explore a room or mess with a fireplace or something. Great voice acting, too. That part's top notch. The plot, though? The plot's...I want to say "it's kind of a mess," but for the most part that's not true. For the most part, it serves. For the most part, it pulls me in. For the most part.

And then there's the ending.

Or, rather, there's the "there is no ending."

I finished the game about seven hours ago and have quite literally been physically ill since that time out of stressed preoccupation with the utter lack of resolution the game has. Okay, partly because of the future sequence with the ongoing off-screen torture/conditioning of Elizabeth throughout, that's sort of a trigger issue for me, so that wasn't a great lead-in to the end of the game's problems, but I've just spent the last few hours mostly thinking about how completely fucked the end of this game is.

Oddly enough, it's not the post-credits thing that irks me the most. That was just sort of annoying in a "I waited around for these long-ass credits to end just for a Schrodinger throwaway line?" way. It's not the Comstock-DeWitt connection which was just annoying in an "I saw this coming a half hour into the game before I even met Elizabeth way" (seriously, I'd said to folks in another RP hangout of mine when I first was getting into the game "If Booker turns out to be her father I'm going to be pissed."). Those are minor issues by comparison to the big one that bothers me: where do things go from there?

This kind of device, the big IT WAS YOU ALL ALONG reveal, that's part of the climax. That's the pre-ending. That's the last nail in the coffin, so to speak. You're supposed to bury the coffin after that. But they don't. They just go, "Welp, I think that's good enough, let's cut to black here," and then end it.

The fuck?

Honestly, I could care less about what the final baptism does to Booker/Comstock. I don't care. But what happens to the rest of the world? Hell, what happens to Elizabeth? They put all this effort into getting here, so...what did they actually accomplish? And I'm not talking about getting into the quantum mechanics of infinite possibilities blah blah whatever, I'm just interested in that specific instance of Elizabeth who, by that time, is pretty clearly separate from her actions when it comes to consequences, meaning she probably wouldn't be "unmade" if that were even a possibility of what they did unless she wanted to be. So where does she go from there? Back to all the lighthouses to explore the world she'd been kept away from for so long? Into the void? Rebooted? What does she want to do with her newfound freedom?

They wouldn't even need to include the details of where it goes from there, just the suggestion, the general direction, would be enough to have some kind of closure. Something akin to, "Ah...The net is vast," or, perhaps more fitting for the tone the whole final sequence was setting, something more like, "Behind him, across vast distances of space and time, from the place he had left, he thought he heard music too. But perhaps it was only an echo." Basically just the 10-30 seconds immediately after where the baptism scene currently ends, the "next step." Because that's the problem: it didn't end there. They cut it short in the middle of the ending. And, apparently, this frustrates me beyond even my own ability to measure, not in a "leave them wanting more way" as there's no way in hell I'd follow up on DLC for the game at this point to look for what resolution they might decide to add to it later. It's a broken ending, and while that type of thing may have been intended to go along with the whole quantum physics gag, as far as I'm concerned, they screwed the pooch in the effort.

I have never been so wholly unsatisfied.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2013, 09:40:50 PM by Shjade »

Offline Koren

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #12 on: July 21, 2013, 12:19:17 AM »
The Necessity of Violence in Bioshock Infinite - Awesome out of Ten
^ above is an article that many of you who are into character and world building may find very interesting

On another note, I'm actually really surprised by the reactions I see here.
Maybe I'm a bit spoiled as the only discussions I've had with it have been with the other game designers at my university, but I really didn't except this sort of hostility to it.

I'll say right off, at no point am I trying or wanting to offend or demean anyone with this, its just my thoughts and opinions on it all, and maybe giving a different perspective to this.

As far as the mechanics, my two complaints can be easily explained away, even if that still means that they will stand out a little bit.
Ken Levine wanted the game to sell. Now of course you may think that's an incredibly broad statement as obviously every game studio wants that, but Ken wanted it more in a broad sense that he wanted the game to be accessible to more people so that they could experience the world of Columbia. Unfortunately due to marketing and the horrible stereotyped perceptions of gamers, shooters remain the best selling genre. He wanted the game to be a platform to lift games out of the CoD style of repetition and to show that innovation in story if nothing else can sell, and can be celebrated. So while it perhaps would have been nice to see it set in another genre or in slightly different controls or mechanics, I can understand the design goal and decision behind making that choice.
The other one is the Vigors. Vigors in the game made absolutely no sense at all. I will be the first to admit that. While the environment and situation was there for them, the lack of NPC's and characters using them greatly set them at odds. The fireman uses the Devils Kiss, but no other NPC does. If they did it would have made more sense, I also understand why they were included without that. It is a game in the Bioshock IP. It wouldn't be bioshock without Plasmids/Vigors. And really when you come down to the mechanical implementation, its just magic and a mana bar reskined. So while it doesnt fit, I do understand why it was included, and to be honest I loved the ones they did include and it made it more fun for me, despite the disconnect. Playing around with the Ocean one (forget what its called at this moment) was great.

Elizabeth was absolutely great, despite the one moment with no update for the lock picking after you save her, which when I played it pissed me off so much I had to walk away from the game for a moment, but that was the only time.
Did anyone else see in the area with all the shops, if you go into one room and just wait, Elizabeth will run over and grab some fairy floss (cotton candy) and start to eat it? That was amazing.
It was also nice to see the way they worked her into the mechanics. You can't hold health or salts so she would supply them to you, but only from what was around in the environment, and it was a limited thing. It was also nice to have an escort based game where you don't have to worry about them all the time.

My look at the plot is this: Its not about Booker and Elizabeth. Okay yeah thats the in your face focus of it, and while I saw some of the stuff coming there was a lot there that I NEVER could have guessed in a million years, but they aren't the core of the story
What its really about? Robert and Rosalind Lutece.

Those two made that story for me. When you think about it, leaving out the ending for the moment I'll get to that soon, none of this would have happened without them. Yes, I mean Booker still would have purged his skins at Wounded Knee and used that as an excuse for his racism and become Comstock at some stage, but without Rosalind and Robert, Columbia never would have been built, they would never have met, they wouldn't have found the tears, Comstock wouldn't have taken Anna and turned her into Elizabeth, and even if you get down to the small details, if Robert hadn't of hesitated at the tear, Anna never would have lost her finger and the story wouldn't have taken place anyway as she wouldn't have the power to jump between realities.

For me this isn't a story about Booker trying to get back his daughter. Its a story about the redemption of two people who knew they damaged lives by interfering.
Just looking at one of the first times you see them for example, when they get Booker to flip the coin. There is a total of 122 marks on the board by the time that the players game occurs. At any given time they could have just stopped bringing Booker back from his reality to do this. They set this up, ferried him across the ocean, helped him through 122 times to see if he would succeed. It wouldn't have happened without their persistence. They even are the ones who help Elizabeth control the tears etc.

(On a side note: Shooting either of the twins in The Blue Ribbon restaurant will result in Rosalind saying "You missed," several times before ultimately stating, "We can afford to do this all day, but the question is, can you?" That was absolutely brilliant and so very entertaining, not to mention a big hint that something was wrong with that)

Okay onto the ending:
I recommend as well that everyone who's only just finished it let it have time to sink in and for you to think about it too. The game plays such a mind game on you I know a few people that changed the way they thought of it just after letting it go for a while.

If you look at it from a solely narrative perspective in the format of a story, yes, they fucked up. But I personally don't see it like that. You play this whole game through Booker's eyes. So it makes sense to me that when he dies your perspective is removed. Your Booker doesn't get to see what happens after wards, and neither do you. The post ending scene kinda solidified that in my mind as you see your Booker returning to get his child back, you see what would have happened to your Booker (as you are the only one that succeeded) if Robert hadn't of taken Anna that day.
And you see that the twins succeeded.

Part of why I think that they did the ending like that as well is that its a game about thought. You have to think the whole way through on things and the ending is no different. With some thought and even I found playing through the game again (you'd be amazed all the things you didn't pick up on and all the references that suddenly make sense and bring up more revelations for you), you can think exactly what happened in the end.
Comstock never existed so neither did Columbia, and never will exist thanks to the powers that Elizabeth used to drown Comstock through Booker. Anna was never taken so Booker never became a drunk or a gambler, he remained a private detective able to care for his daughter. New York was never attacked and historical events around the Boxer rebellion and Wounded Knee were never distorted like they were in the Columbia world. And as Elizabeth said, there is always a man, a lighthouse, a city. So we know that sort of story is meant to repeat again.
But even in the details. The twins are still alive somewhere, floating around in space between realities however they want. But with the separated worlds alive twins are also out somewhere. The black woman and white man from the start of the game probably never found each other and fell in love, but were probably safe for that. Daisy probably was never driven insane by abuse of that sort of situation. Even the preacher from the start of the game, the one who baptizes you (and who is the same guy who did it at Wounded Knee as well, I loved that bit of symmetry) is probably still working in the Wounded Knee area, never having been taken by Comstock to serve Columbia.

But the bit I love is that you can't know for sure. Its not about knowing. The same as real life. We don't make a decision and see the joy or pain that unfolds after that, we just keep going, and that's what the game forces you to do.

I will say though, the start of the game was a stroke of genius. I was so pissed off when I started the game, I thought they'd just copy and pasted the start from bioshock 1 because it worked so damn well, just with reverse metrics, up instead of down etc. To the point where I even thought the game was going to be ruined because of it. But then the way that they tie it in at the end was great and really made me think 'well, I'm a fuck wit, and thats brillant.'

The idea that Songbird, made from Rapture technology by Fink after seeing through one of the tears, and then drowning in Rapture, in the area where you first see the splicers, where you encounter the Big Daddy and Little Sister (who are remade in Songbird and Elizabeth) was a great touch, especially with the dead Big Daddy and weeping Little Sister in the background of that scene.
Song birds death was heart breaking as well, that he knew he was dying but he didn't care as long as he had Elizabeth, even after she betrayed him.

And personally even above all of this, they achieved what they wanted to do story wise, they did it fairly, and they didn't back down and rewrite it for those who didn't agree, and that I love.

Just wondering? How much do people know about all the various Easter Eggs in the game?

Anyway I think I've rambled a bit much. Hopefully just given a bit of a difference perspective to it. And hopefully made sense.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #13 on: July 21, 2013, 12:57:01 AM »
Ken Levine wanted the game to sell. Now of course you may think that's an incredibly broad statement as obviously every game studio wants that, but Ken wanted it more in a broad sense that he wanted the game to be accessible to more people so that they could experience the world of Columbia. Unfortunately due to marketing and the horrible stereotyped perceptions of gamers, shooters remain the best selling genre. He wanted the game to be a platform to lift games out of the CoD style of repetition and to show that innovation in story if nothing else can sell, and can be celebrated.

And this is why he should have NOT made this game.  Instead of making the game he wanted to play, or the story he wanted to tell, he 'dumbed it down' for us 'idiots'.  No.  Just no.

Offline animationprincessofOooTopic starter

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #14 on: July 21, 2013, 01:25:38 AM »
Okay now you guys are starting to make me look like I'm not obsessed the game and I usually delve in so deep into these things I know everything about them within days. I tend to get obsessed with things from time to time BioShock Infinite was definitely one of them during the month of May but from everyone discussing everything I also want to throw in, did anyone make the connection between Andrew Ryan and Booker DeWitt considering Booker could activate the bath Spears when they're all locked down?

Offline Koren

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #15 on: July 21, 2013, 01:34:52 AM »
And this is why he should have NOT made this game.  Instead of making the game he wanted to play, or the story he wanted to tell, he 'dumbed it down' for us 'idiots'.  No.  Just no.

Um that's not what it was at all. And thats certainly not what I was saying

Shooters sell. That's something we all know if you look at money that genres as a whole bring into the market

Ken Levine kept the game a shooter because he knew it would sell and it would get the story he wanted to tell out there. He didn't get the story dumbed down, and no where ever did he call anyone idiots, and neither did I. He put his story into a genre that more people would have access too.

Go read that article I posted and it may change the way you think about the shooter side of it, because even the game mechanics tell a story. If he wanted to make it dumbed down, the mechanics wouldn't be what they are.


Okay now you guys are starting to make me look like I'm not obsessed the game and I usually delve in so deep into these things I know everything about them within days. I tend to get obsessed with things from time to time BioShock Infinite was definitely one of them during the month of May but from everyone discussing everything I also want to throw in, did anyone make the connection between Andrew Ryan and Booker DeWitt considering Booker could activate the bath Spears when they're all locked down?

Yeah I made that connection, but I don't really think that there was anything to it.
I mean there's multiple versions of Columbia, so it would stand that there was multiple versions of Rapture and I'd say they were in one of them as opposed to the true setting from Bioshock 1

Reasons:
While the bathysphere that brought up Jack to Rapture was there, the broken tunnel he passes through after getting electrobolt isn't broken like it was
In Bioshock 1 there is no Big Daddy corpse in the location there is seen at the end of Bioshock Infinite
Electrobolt was taken but the door wasn't malfunctioning in the Infinite one

Offline Shjade

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2013, 02:25:18 AM »
Okay onto the ending:
I recommend as well that everyone who's only just finished it let it have time to sink in and for you to think about it too. The game plays such a mind game on you I know a few people that changed the way they thought of it just after letting it go for a while.

If you look at it from a solely narrative perspective in the format of a story, yes, they fucked up. But I personally don't see it like that. You play this whole game through Booker's eyes. So it makes sense to me that when he dies your perspective is removed. Your Booker doesn't get to see what happens after wards, and neither do you. The post ending scene kinda solidified that in my mind as you see your Booker returning to get his child back, you see what would have happened to your Booker (as you are the only one that succeeded) if Robert hadn't of taken Anna that day.
And you see that the twins succeeded.

Part of why I think that they did the ending like that as well is that its a game about thought. You have to think the whole way through on things and the ending is no different. With some thought and even I found playing through the game again (you'd be amazed all the things you didn't pick up on and all the references that suddenly make sense and bring up more revelations for you), you can think exactly what happened in the end.
Comstock never existed so neither did Columbia, and never will exist thanks to the powers that Elizabeth used to drown Comstock through Booker. Anna was never taken so Booker never became a drunk or a gambler, he remained a private detective able to care for his daughter. New York was never attacked and historical events around the Boxer rebellion and Wounded Knee were never distorted like they were in the Columbia world. And as Elizabeth said, there is always a man, a lighthouse, a city. So we know that sort of story is meant to repeat again.
But even in the details. The twins are still alive somewhere, floating around in space between realities however they want. But with the separated worlds alive twins are also out somewhere. The black woman and white man from the start of the game probably never found each other and fell in love, but were probably safe for that. Daisy probably was never driven insane by abuse of that sort of situation. Even the preacher from the start of the game, the one who baptizes you (and who is the same guy who did it at Wounded Knee as well, I loved that bit of symmetry) is probably still working in the Wounded Knee area, never having been taken by Comstock to serve Columbia.

You say you should take time to let it sink in and think about it...and then you note things that either are inaccurate or can't be confirmed, ie: fanfiction.

You don't see Booker returning to get his child back. You see Booker apparently waking up in his office and looking for his daughter on the same day he gives her away (the date on the calendar is the same), which means whether or not she's in the crib is actually sort of irrelevant without knowing whether or not she's going to stay in the crib if she's even there (since he might still give her away, though to whom if Comstock doesn't exist is another story - debts are debts).

Booker was a drunk and a gambler before Anna was taken away - that's why he had to give her away, to settle his gambling debts. So having her, if she's even there, doesn't change anything there.

You know the twins succeeded all along just by the fact that you're in Columbia. Nothing about their experiments is resolved by the end of the game. They are no doubt still messing around with stuff because, hey, it's not like they have anything better to do.

The rest of your last paragraph is conjecture. Is it possible? Sure. It's also possible that suddenly everyone turned into anthropomorphic pigs. That doesn't mean it happened and certainly doesn't mean the game's story presents it as having happened. All we know is that Elizabeths drowned Booker to prevent Comstock from happening, or at least that was the intent. That is the extent of what is known. Which is why it's broken as an ending: leaving the end of the story as a Mad Libs entry for the reader/player to fill in is not an ending.

Offline Koren

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2013, 02:34:07 AM »
Okay my mistake. I didnt mean for it to come across as this is definitely how it is, I'm sorry if it appeared that way

Also my bad on the gambling and drunk thing. Sorry. Been a while since I played it so when I was writing I didn't realize I had that backwards.

That's just my perspective and my thoughts. Personally I'm a little sick of games where everything goes through perfectly and things are predictable and it all works out. I'm sick of being told exactly how it all ends up, its one of the problems I'm having with The Last of Us. I like that they left it open because I can think about what might have happened. I like to imagine what the world would have been like after, and especially playing it through again as I said and seeing the little details they left in there for all of that.

But as I said, my perspective is that the story ends there because you are looking at it from Booker's perspective in showing the story of the twins, and that's over.
The twins actual goal was to reunite Booker and Elizabeth without ruining the worlds by interfering themselves, because Robert still felt guilty over what they did to separate them in the first place. They weren't trying to conduct more experiments, they were fixing what they broke. Its on a few audio logs around the game, Rosalind speaking about why her brother wants to reunite them. So in that respect they finally succeeded.



On a side note: Id actually love to get a hold of the music they slowed down and put in as ambiance just to hear what its actually like and what the lyrics are.

Offline Shjade

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2013, 07:25:58 AM »
But as I said, my perspective is that the story ends there because you are looking at it from Booker's perspective in showing the story of the twins, and that's over.

Possibly. Of course, in that case, why do we get to see the Elizabeths disappearing one by one after the baptism? He wouldn't have seen that - he's already gone. If they can show that much from "outside" his perspective, why not the next step?

Which music would you like to track down? As in, from what part of the game. I bet it's around somewhere.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2013, 07:27:08 AM »
I don't think I'm being hostile toward the game, personally, as the whole concept was my literary focus in school (Deconstruction Theory), I loved it to pieces. I'm looking at it critically, and no real work of art or media has ever suffered for being looked at critically. I don't know of this is Ken Levine's problem or if it's executive meddling, but again Extra Credits and I are on the same page:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/in-service-to-the-brand

I think the game is great, especially considering it got delayed twice, because I've never played a game that was all that great when it got delayed more than once, because game developers don't seem to realize, "Hey we've got time to finish our original vision." and instead seem to think, "Now we've got more time to add more crap!" Sadly I find it happens nine times out of ten. :\

Again this might be executive meddling, but look at the early release stuff and the finished game, almost worlds apart. A lot of stuff that originally seemed to be the focus got pushed back or removed, and I think that because someone decided to push Bioshock rather than Bioshock Infinite you end up with a lot of disconnect.

Personally I don't get Chris's CoD thing. Honestly, anyone who uses that is obviously reaching in my book these days seeing as CoD has become such a general scapegoat. I don't think it was any more shooty or violent than the original Bioshock. I just think that it doesn't fit Infinite as well as it does the original.

Offline Shjade

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #20 on: July 21, 2013, 08:11:38 AM »
Relevant to my position, and possibly a more fair (or at least less outraged) assessment of the ending's issues, completely separate from anything physics-related: http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/maguilera/blog/spoilers-why-i-m-disappointed-with-bioshock-infini/100414/

tl;dr - The article's point is that the story 90% of the game builds up is not the story that gets an ending. Some other story gets an ending that, while good for that story, does nothing for the "main" one.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #21 on: July 21, 2013, 08:26:37 AM »
Relevant to my position, and possibly a more fair (or at least less outraged) assessment of the ending's issues, completely separate from anything physics-related: http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/maguilera/blog/spoilers-why-i-m-disappointed-with-bioshock-infini/100414/

tl;dr - The article's point is that the story 90% of the game builds up is not the story that gets an ending. Some other story gets an ending that, while good for that story, does nothing for the "main" one.
I can't call that wrong, but I'm just going to go ahead and do so. I think he was expecting another Rapture (more in service to the brand stuff) and I think this is one place they got it right. Drop the city. Drop it like a china plate. It's actually not what's important this time. The city is literally and metaphorically a vehicle for the plot. It could be seen as a testament to Comstock's ambitions, but other than setting the scene this is Booker and Elizabeth's story. Across all eventualities and universes the city was a vehicle. It's hardly the focus, and they were right to drop it out of focus fairly quickly. It makes me wonder if he waited around for the post-credits scene too.
 

Offline Koren

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #22 on: July 21, 2013, 10:05:22 AM »
I think the game is great, especially considering it got delayed twice, because I've never played a game that was all that great when it got delayed more than once, because game developers don't seem to realize, "Hey we've got time to finish our original vision." and instead seem to think, "Now we've got more time to add more crap!" Sadly I find it happens nine times out of ten. :\

Again this might be executive meddling, but look at the early release stuff and the finished game, almost worlds apart. A lot of stuff that originally seemed to be the focus got pushed back or removed, and I think that because someone decided to push Bioshock rather than Bioshock Infinite you end up with a lot of disconnect.

Honestly that happens more times then you think. And as a game developer, its hard reading this sort of stuff and watching gamers think that we do it maliciously. Its not that at all. Sometimes yes it is executive meddling, and publishers often get in the way of a great game, some times for the good, sometimes for the bad. Sometimes its about putting out a game that will make enough money to keep the studio doors open so that people have a job to make the next game and hopefully make a better one, and sometimes its just the publishers being scared of where their money is going.

One of the assassins creed testers said he quit the industry because it broke his heart seeing amazing feature after amazing feature being taken out because of bug or problem or they just didn't have time. The God of War developers have openly said they hated working on the final boss because they had to reduce it down so much just to get it to work and deliver on time. One of my last games at uni had audio cut from it completely because it was either that or not deliver a game at all or fail. The developers of Journey went a year over schedule and went bankrupt finishing their game, but not all studios can be so sure of making back their money as they were.

Original ideas and concepts for a game are normally grand, broad and so ridiculously unachievable. The main thing we get taught in project management is scope balancing. We can say we have a year to do this so lets do all this, but usually around a third of that either gets cut or reduced because of various bugs, technical issues, money, staffing issues, any number of problems that arise. In programming we have a say to triple any estimate on work to make it more accurate. Something you think will take you an hour will most likely take three if its something new you're doing. And good games try and do something new.
Sometimes the adding of 'more crap' as you put it is a way to make sure its a game, and not just a recycled software product. Regardless of whether vigors fit into the world, they still added to the game play. Maybe that was a decision they made because they realized through testing players didn't have enough options.
Testing always changes your game. Id love to see the testing notes and iterative builds of a big AAA studio to see just how much they had to tear out because it didnt fit with the player, even though they love it. Being a game player and being a game designer as so very different you can almost never predict how a game will work until you test it and then you have to adapt for that testing.

So with this in mind, the fact that a AAA studio managed to deliver so many NEW things to a game, even with going overtime, which also means over budget (funding on games is limited as all fuck), is great. They proved that helpful escorts can work. They delivered a great story and for the most part, proved that you can make a 'fake' or controvertial ending without having to change it like some other studios get pressured into doing. They managed to create an amazing world full of life. And they managed to accurately portray and touch on some of the most disgusting aspects of the human psyche and social issues we still have today without brushing over it.

Im not saying its not a flawed game. Im saying its a game made by a studio under pressure and they did an amazing job regardless.

Sorry for the rant, and its not directed at you specifically, it just irks me in general when developers do the best they can (certain games aside) and get torn to shreds because of it


Possibly. Of course, in that case, why do we get to see the Elizabeths disappearing one by one after the baptism? He wouldn't have seen that - he's already gone. If they can show that much from "outside" his perspective, why not the next step?

Which music would you like to track down? As in, from what part of the game. I bet it's around somewhere.

I always kinda saw that as his ghost rising and looking down on them.

I doubt it would be. In the background of certain areas is a music track slowed down I think it was 1000 times to create ambiance for the area. Its an easter egg. Im not sure they expected anyone to find it so quick. We'll probably have to wait for someone to track it down or hack it out of the game or something before we can listen to the proper one.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #23 on: July 21, 2013, 10:52:54 AM »
Personally I don't get Chris's CoD thing. Honestly, anyone who uses that is obviously reaching in my book these days seeing as CoD has become such a general scapegoat. I don't think it was any more shooty or violent than the original Bioshock. I just think that it doesn't fit Infinite as well as it does the original.
It's the mechanical aspect of how the game plays.  In Call of Duty, you get 'set piece battles' where big things happen, and then you get a lull, where people talk, you get to do other non-combat things, or just get lored to death, and then the next set piece arrives and you get a bunch of bodies to murder in shockingly gruesome ways. And then another lull in the 'action' where more stuff is told/explain/whatever and then the next combat arena happens.  This is not good, nor bad.  This is how CoD built it's name.  Bioshock Infinite copies it, instead of following it's own beat.

Relevant to my position, and possibly a more fair (or at least less outraged) assessment of the ending's issues, completely separate from anything physics-related: http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/maguilera/blog/spoilers-why-i-m-disappointed-with-bioshock-infini/100414/

tl;dr - The article's point is that the story 90% of the game builds up is not the story that gets an ending. Some other story gets an ending that, while good for that story, does nothing for the "main" one.

I can't call that wrong, but I'm just going to go ahead and do so. I think he was expecting another Rapture (more in service to the brand stuff) and I think this is one place they got it right. Drop the city. Drop it like a china plate. It's actually not what's important this time. The city is literally and metaphorically a vehicle for the plot. It could be seen as a testament to Comstock's ambitions, but other than setting the scene this is Booker and Elizabeth's story. Across all eventualities and universes the city was a vehicle. It's hardly the focus, and they were right to drop it out of focus fairly quickly. It makes me wonder if he waited around for the post-credits scene too.

I think you're right and wrong, on what he's meaning in that article.  Yes, he was looking for another 'Rapture', but he wasn't looking for the city set, he was looking for another story of 'Rapture'.

See what made the original Bioshock 'cool' was that the actual twist inside that game no one actually saw coming.  The clues were there, but you really had to be paying attention.  'Would you kindly...'  The other thing about Bioshock is that there was a choice laid out for you.  The entire story leads up to it.

But in Infinite, not only is it pretty obvious, it's predetermined.  It's all predetermined in BI, there is no choice, you're just along for the ride.  And people who experienced Mr. Levine's only other Bioshock game (he didn't work on Bioshock 2) were expecting to experience another well done story like the first, and most were happy with what they got, but for those of us who may be a little more bookwormy and know how most stories work, we got fed a rather lackluster narrative where we're treated like idiots have everything told to us.  Book ended with massive scenes of violence and mayhem, maybe to distract us from the fact that there's no choice here.

In fact, my use of the word 'predetermined' may actually be incorrect, because we didn't get an ending.  What we got was an infinite loop of cop outs.  As the Intercomm Girlfriend (Elizabeth) puts it, paraphrased, "There's always another city, with a lighthouse and a man."  There is not 'ending' because by the games own admission, there's no end.  And never will be.  So having Booker die at the end resolves and changes nothing.

Offline Shjade

Re: bioshock infinite
« Reply #24 on: July 21, 2013, 11:32:53 AM »
I can't call that wrong, but I'm just going to go ahead and do so. I think he was expecting another Rapture (more in service to the brand stuff) and I think this is one place they got it right. Drop the city. Drop it like a china plate. It's actually not what's important this time. The city is literally and metaphorically a vehicle for the plot. It could be seen as a testament to Comstock's ambitions, but other than setting the scene this is Booker and Elizabeth's story. Across all eventualities and universes the city was a vehicle. It's hardly the focus, and they were right to drop it out of focus fairly quickly. It makes me wonder if he waited around for the post-credits scene too.

...I think you might be misreading the article. He's fine with dropping the city. He's not fine with dropping Elizabeth, which is essentially what the ending does.

Quote from: MAguilera
Infinite stopped being about Columbia as soon as you go through the first tear (I believe Brad pointed out this in the spoilercast) your understanding of what makes Columbia interesting fades. You struggle to understand how this Columbia is different from the last but then you jump again and at that point it is no longer about the city. That works just fine, because (unlike the original Bioshock) it is now about the girl. But then at the very end the story doesn't deliver on the new paradigm.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2013, 11:34:44 AM by Shjade »