The Big Picture: Shock Treatment

[Amaror]

Some of the mechanics they use to present the story I feel don't really work and it bugs me as much as time paradoxes. That being said I had a lot of fun playing it be more fun even discussing it with others and come to the conclusion that it tried to tackle theories it did not really understand and failed.

Mostly about how constants just do not fit in with multi verse theory at all. Liz suddenly becoming omniscient and some details about Booker being drowned. For instance: Liz drowned Booker thus removing Com-Stock and causing her to cease to exist. Why then wouldn't those events just loop anyway since she never existed to interfere with them.

Still good try.

There was another good post after the experienced points column about infinite explaining that.
I will try to recreate it, but if it doesn't work, go there.
So, in the End, after the cutscenes, you shortly play a few seconds of broker again, so he seems to be alive.
For clearance reason i will here refer to Anna and Elizabeth as two seperate persons.
In every Universe were Comstock comes out of the Baptism, he will steal an Anna from another Broker, thus creating an Elizabeth, which will consequently go back in time and kill all brokers before the baptism. But when Comstock isn't there, there also was no elizabeth to drown him so he does survive. Therefore: Any Universe that creates an Comstock, will also create an Elizabeth and therefore erase itself. Any Universe that makes Broker refuse the baptism, doesn't create Comstock, doesn't create Elizabeth and therefore stays in existence.
This way only the "Brokers" of the multiverse survive.

 

[jFr[e]ak93]

Bob, that was the best interpretation of this game I've heard. It seems like too many people, myself included, got hung up on all the supposedly-deep themes that were actually pretty damn shallow. But in the end, it's just one dude's failure to deal with his massive guilt. Beautiful.

I agree. He nailed it. Even Comstock's version of Christianity has nothing to do with real forgiveness, it's all about him and how great he is... when he knows he's a total douche.

This game did so much right. I hope the dlc doesn't leave a bad taste in my mouth...

 

[Roman Monaghan]

So, apparently he learned his lesson from the Mass Effect 3 ending episode and actually decided to play the game first before telling us why we're all wrong about the ending. At least he seems to be paying attention to his fanbase on that point, if nothing else.

 

[roguewriter]

I have to concur with Bob's summary about what Ken Levine was, ultimately, trying to say; however that's not me saying I accept or enjoyed the outcome. In truth, I suppose I fall within the category of, as Bob put it, those people who *wanted* the narrative to remain somewhat straightforward, i.e. "Dog, Dog, Dog, Dog..." To be more specific, I wanted Booker to not be the sad victim of his own sins and ultimately accept that he needed to be "punished" for them (namely die) to set things right; rather I would have preferred that he and Elizabeth find a means to overcome the impossible odds and "fate" set against them.

The Lucteces even indicated in their theories that while there were constants in the multiverse there were also variables, small things which could, in theory, lead to larger changes and unforeseen alternate paths, i.e. the millions and millions of Multiverses. It would have been cool to have Booker's relationship/bond with Liz be that variable that allows them to set things right without seemingly resetting all the Wibbly Wobbley, Timey Whimey aspects of the narrative. Had they not made Liz Booker's daughter a romance could have been the device through which both her and Booker overcome the impossible odds, or perhaps it could have been something else. Still, all of that doesn't detract from the fact that Infinite is a pretty damn fantastic game. Just wasn't what I had thought/hoped it would be.

 

[jFr[e]ak93]

But what was the significance of those four gay blokes?

They were singing a song they couldn't possibly have heard. It was foreshadowing the Alternate worlds.

So, does someone write the song later in the game or what? I'm still confused and not entirely convinced that you and Yahtzee are both trolling me.

According to google, they were singing God Only Knows by the Beach Boys. Came out in 1966, more than 50 years after Infinite is set.
Other songs in Infinite include Girls Just Wanna Have fun which plays in the fairground.

An acoustic version of "Everybody Wants To Rule the World" also crops up (Tears for Fears).

Does anyone know the name of the song played during the title screen? I feel like I should know it.

 

[Roman Monaghan]

That awkward moment where Bob. Fucking Movie Bob. Of all people. Is the only other person on the internet who fucking gets the ending of Bioshock Infinite.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Are you seriously comparing Shakespeare to Bioshock Infinite?

No, I'm not. What would make you think that?

I was comparing your implication that stories shouldn't bother with details and themes to the history of literature, where such "diversions" are actually very important.

The answer is quite simple, because the themes in Shakespeare's plays tie back into the characters and the story.

As do those in Bioshock Infinite.

I'm not even going to start delving deep into Shakespeare because you just compared an entire oeuvre to one game,

No, I didn't.

Why is the theme of racism there?

Because of the predominance of racism in the setting?

Why do Comstock's religious views never get explored, sure we know he is a fire and brim stone man but WHY? He got saved once so why is he talking about Killing people rather than Saving them?

Because that's how a lot of religious people act? Look at all the people who are supposedly Christian, but who also espouse political views supporting the death penalty, torture, or war.

Why does there have to be two warring parties, one a bunch of racists and the other a group of murderers?

Because that's the story, and it's how the writers chose to write it. Why does there have to be an alien in E.T: The Extra Terrestrial?

Why did it have to be a city in the sky?

Because that's the setting and it's how the writers chose to write it. Why does The Tempest have to be set on a magical island?

After all you just finished watching a video where the story is basically reduced to "Man needs to reconcile with his past and accept it". None of the other elements impact the way he reconciles with his past. They are therefore pointless.

By this logic, 99% of most literature is pointless, because they could all be reduced to a few sentences of summary. I think you're missing the point of storytelling. It's not just about the conclusions.

 

[MPerce]

This is pretty close to how I felt about the game. I found it interesting that I heard from a lot of critics before the game that this was Elizabeth's game, that she's a incredible character and that the story revolves around her character arc.

When I finally played it, I didn't find this to be the case at all. Elizabeth was fine, but this game is all about Booker. And that's good, because Booker ended up being absolutely fascinating to me, much more than I expected. He wants nothing more than to forget the sins of his past and move on with his life, but he can't. He can never forgive himself for his atrocities at Wounded Knee and the selling of his daughter, and even when he tries to redeem himself in Colombia he is required to revert to his brutal ways. Slate and Fink go out of their way to do this, forcing him to kill wave after wave of people just to remind him of the monster he is. So in the end there's only one way for Booker to achieve his goal.

"That idiot priest needs to learn the difference between baptizing a man and drowning one."

It turns out that, in Booker's case,there's actually no difference between the two at all.

 

[1337mokro]

snip

Thank you for answering with a whole lot of hot air. Like I said the answer you eventually gave was... because it's Bioshock. Just because the setting is in 1920's does not mean Racism has to feature so prominently. We could have made Columbia part of China and had only Chinese people in the flying city, the same story can unfold and no racism. Like I said it's an exhibit something to stare at and not intricate to the story in any way.

So you say the characters change because of oh let's pick one... the proletarian revolt? How are the characters impacted by this and how does it develop them?

You apparently know so answer me how Booker leading a revolt that we never see him lead and getting betrayed for really not a whole lot of reasons change him? What does Comstock being a racist zealout add? What does the city itself add, it's pretty sure, but what does it add?

We can easily answer that question with Rapture. It was there for both the story and the gameplay. It was both a safe haven and the prison to hold you in. Both literally and figuratively. We can explain it through the gameplay as well seeing as it had horror elements and claustrophobia is a big part of the oppressive atmosphere.

But why Columbia HAD to be a flying city is really answered by the religious elements which themselves are pointless to the whole plot because they are not explored. We basically get the quite insulting insinuation that religous folk view their beliefs as nothing but a get out of jail free card and by your dismissive answer of "relgious folk just be crazy yo" I again see why you have such a hard grasping the concept of the question "Why".

You see people do things for reasons. That is the why. Sure religious people can be insane and kill people. However they have their reasons. Be they political, economical, religious, vengeance and so on. You see we don't explore how a man who believed himself saved through baptism over remorse and guilt for killing ethnic groups can then go on to become a brim stone preaching racist.

We don't explore that. He just is. The "why" is left unanswered. Booker doesn't really change. He was a cynical bastard before and he was still a cynical bastard then. You see you can pretend like the development is there, but it isn't.

Did I say you should summarize them? What I said was take away anything that does not directly influence the characters or is required for the plot and then look at what's left. I don't really get how you end up at summarization from me saying you should examine a story for superfluous elements.

Seriously just try it. Try it with Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite.

 

[Voren]

As someone who has never played the game, I am asking this out of ignorance. Wouldn't going back and stopping Booker from fighting in Wounded Knee make more sense than killing him?

The answer to that is actually explained towards the end of the game:

For every action there is an opposite action in a different universe.

Ex: Booker takes baptism in one universe therefore he doesn't take baptism in another one.

SO, if they were to go into the past and say "Hey man you shouldn't go to wounded Knee" and Booker says "Yeah ok man sounds good", there will be a different universe where he will always say "I'll go to wounded Knee so fuck off" which would lead to the path of Baptism or no Baptism and so on.

Therefore, the only way of securing the good choice is killing the one that will make the bad choice at the moment of choosing, thereby eliminating all possibilities of that continuity to go on and all other universes will always be the ones where he makes the good/opposite choice.

Essentially, it didn't matter if it was wounded knee or not at the end one Booker had to die in order to eliminate those possible futures.

CAPTCHA: Brain Games..... no shit?

 

[MattKirby]

Well. No MovieBob for me today, I didn't play Bioshock Infinite.

 

[PhiMed]

Why do all the contributors to this site think it's completely okay to have features full of spoilers on a game that's been out for less than a month? I haven't seen this type of shitty behavior with games I don't give a shit about or can afford to buy new.

This is the third major contributor to do this, and the game hasn't even been out for three damn weeks

Why does this web site keep doing this to my #1 most anticipated (but currently un-affordable) game of 2013?

What the shit?

 

[19]

This may be my favorite Big Picture yet. At the very least it's extremely thoughtful.
Thanks Bob.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Thank you for answering with a whole lot of hot air. Like I said the answer you eventually gave was... because it's Bioshock. Just because the setting is in 1920's does not mean Racism has to feature so prominently.

But nothing HAS to feature at all. It's fiction. It's whatever the writer wants it to be. There's no reason anything has to be logical, or meet your expectations. That's my entire point. There's no reason Shakespeare had to write the stories he did, or include details that ultimately have no bearing on the outcome of the story. But he did, just like all stories do.

I'm not sure what you want - a sterile world with all the racism and religion removed? Why shouldn't a story involve racism and religion, because it insults you or something?

We basically get the quite insulting insinuation that religous folk view their beliefs as nothing but a get out of jail free card and by your dismissive answer of "relgious folk just be crazy yo"...

Wow, that's quite a weird interpretation. I really don't understand how you took that from what I said. Just because a story feature crazed religious zealots, does not mean that all religious people are that way. You are confusing the specific with the general.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Why do all the contributors to this site think it's completely okay to have features full of spoilers on a game that's been out for less than a month?

Why shouldn't they? They put a huge spoiler warning on it. Why shouldn't something that people are currently playing be discussed? It's their website/video/article/whatever.

 

[abort_user]

It's really not hard to find plotholes in that storyline. For starters, it has the same problem with Looper. It mixes multiverse with a singular universe. What I mean by this is time either branches or it doesn't. So if it branches then you have infinite possibilities and NOTHING once done can be undone. The reason being is that the act "undoing" something merely creates yet another universe. So even going into the past to change cannot erase the events of the present. It just creates an alternate reality where the present never happened. This fact nullifies the ending. And I haven't even brought up time travel paradoxes into the conversation. With that said, these types of stories really aren't about the time travel. I was merely pointing out you'd have to be blind to not see the plotholes.