@joesguy @VercettiTommyy Firstly, this is the first intelligent and documented response I ever got from people who disliked Infinite. Finally. Great. Now, that's classic storytelling you're referring to. Intro-Body-Ending. However, there are different ways to do it, you don't necessarily have to stick to the same old principles. That's where Levine failed in Bioshock 1 (not because of his incapability as a writer- I do regard him as by far the best videogame writer at the moment- but because the very difficult concepts it explored, and the extent of the revelation offered by the Ryan climax - one of the best moments in videogame history, I might add), so that's the reason why he opted for this, with Infinite being an even more delicate construction of ideas- so that everybody can have his or her very own ending. While it adheres to the model built by the plot, I see no harm in the questionable validity of each interpretation.
Now, quantum mechanics are used to explain why the city is floating, instead of, i dunno, lighter than air dirigibles, as well as the tears, while interestingly masking the reasons behind this, Beach Boys' song 'God Only Knows' ,played in the barbershop, serving as a intelligent anachronism. The tears are accessible to everybody (another song parallel, 'Everybody Wants to Rule the World'), but can be manipulated only by Elizabeth, due to her severed finger, which led to her existence in two alternate dimensions at the same time. Her powers certainly peaked in her youth, before the syphon was built, being practically limitless and allowing her to travel anywhere at any time, which explains her knowledge. There might be some minor inconsistencies with the charts, I'll look specifically on my next replay, but that's the overall trend of it.
The fact that Booker is a different personality in every dimension is logical, as he is shaped by that world's events, so his memories therefore melding, is, again, a principle of quantum mechanics and not the traditional time/alternate reality travel concept, where two separate entities are created. Even in the dimension where Booker was dead- and a martyr- he retains his past traits, and when confronted with Fitzroy, who was using his death as a revolutionary spark, she finds herself in quite a predicament. Which tells one or two things about human nature.
Gameplay-wise? Sure, not too creative or groundbreaking, but we're living in the Call of Duty era, so we can't really complain. It's functional, and does at least the same things Bioshock 1's acclaimed gameplay did, just in a different context. In a lot of comments, people complain that enemies are not as memorable as in B1 and B2, that characters aren't as memorable, that the atmosphere isn't as pressing. Well, sure, but it doesn't try that. The first two were horror games, while in Infinite, there's zero attempt for that. Of course the bat-shit insane splicers, who scared the hell out of us, or Dr. Steinman's distrubing experiments are going to stick in mind much better than, say, a Mechanized Patriot, or the Lutece quotes' highly missable implications. Not necessarily because of a higher merit, though. Same goes with the atmosphere- you need to detach yourself from the fact that you're isolated on the bottom of the ocean, and not expect the same pressing atmosphere. It's a completely different experience. I find the background info offerend by the Voxophones, and the plot twists offered by the Lutece comments quite ingenious. The player who searches for these and tries to connect them will be rewarded with a better understanding of the game. Much better than the classic, unmissable 'gameplay-cutscene-gameplay- all revealing cutscene' , in my books.
The lighthouse is not a lighthouse per se; it symbolizes a constant. Remember constants and variables? The coin flip is a variable, but the result of the coin flip itself is a constant, serving further as a starting point. Quantum mechanics argues that whenever a variable is reached , and a decision is taken, an alternate dimension where the opposite decision is taken is automatically spawned. Time flow is normally regarded as linear- a river- which would consequently lead to a paradox. A paradox would be created when Elizabeth drawns Booker. Booker dies, Anna is never born, Elizabeth doesn't kill Booker. Booker lives, Anna is born, Elizabeth kills Booker. This goes on for an infinite number of times. But, as Lutece states,time is not a reiver, but an ocean, therefore granting independence of events and cutting off interdependencies. Therefore, Booker's death before the baptism has nothing to do with time : it only changes that a decision is not made. It does not mean all Bookers in all other universes die. His death is therefore a variable, while his lack of decision becomes a constant. Comstock's 'lack of birth' is a constant once he is eliminated, and once all possibilities of his birth are eliminated, that's it- it doesn't matter if Booker continues to live, because it has already happened ('dies,died, will die'). Booker's death is a variable because no paradox is created, despite the fact that he technically dies. Since the variable is turned to a constant, he cannot choose whether to become Comstock or to remain Booker- he MUST remain Booker. Therefore, the post-credit scene has a lot of sense, as it offers the perspective of Booker fathering Anna without the existence of Comstock in any other dimension.
@joesguy @VercettiTommyy Gladly. I, for one, do not understand the brain's obsession with resolve. Why do we always need to be told 'this and this happened, and this is how everything concluded' ? Why do we always want somebody to think it over for us? What is a 'proper epilogue', in non-clichee terms?
In a game as intellectually challenging as Levine's Bioshock series, it's hard- almost impossible- to have an ending that will appeal to everybody. Since all three games rely heavily on art, literature, and thought-provoking scientific concepts, different people might have different expectations from the ending. I, for one, thought the Andrew Ryan encounter in the first game was the actual climax, while the actual ending faded off.
Therefore, Infinite offers us a clue in the title, which suggest permanence, continuity, endlessness. It does the same with the song 'Will the Circle be Unbroken' , the circle being the perfect example of infinity. Upon introducing the Multiverse Theory with the lighthouse scene, Levine has us wondering whether our actions indeed have a clear impact throughout alternate dimensions, or just in one - remember the song. Quantum mechanics, specifically the Quantum Field Theory, is used in order to explain Elizabeth's gifts, and her ability of creating tears. Quite masterfully, I might add. Social study and human nature are used in determining the chaotic side of both conflicting parties, namely Comstock's army and Fitzroy's Vox.
The game's ending is not an ending per se, it's just a means of supplying parallel starting points for the game's plot. The fact that the final scene is ambiguous is perfects, and gets us thinking to the implications- and extent- of Booker's death. Does it mean that Elizabeth's existence is also forfeit? Was she conceived before or after Booker's baptism? How many dimensions were left unaffected? Is this turn of events ironic- as Booker left out to find his daughter, he ends up spending quality time with her, without even knowing it? Isn't it ironic that Booker ends up protecting Elizabeth from himself?
This is what makes the ending so brilliant. The game gives you all the necessary tools- scientific models, literature parallels, plot ideas from Voxophones, quotes by the Luteces, offers you the Multiverse Theory take, and lets you experiment with them. I'd rather have this than the usual 'this is exactly what happened, no need to think it over, thank you for playing'. I hope I cleared at least some stuff up related to my interpretation.
@joesguy @VercettiTommyy @advocacy 'Artsy excuse' ? Excuse for what? That's the game, it combines visual art, audio art, literature, sociology, politics and science/science-fiction. I'd hardly call the game's plot mix an 'excuse'. I couldn't care less that people either don't have the mental capacity or don't try to take all these into consideration, and put their own imagination and general knowledge into the mix, I was just stating MY opinion on the article. Can't expect everybody who walks the Earth to understand Levine's ideas. Also, 'troll defense' ? I'd suggest re-familiarizing yourself with the meaning of 'troll'.
@advocacy It's not at all different. Only better in terms of graphics. The guy who wrote this is an attention seeking troll. As any such individual does, he contradicts himself numerous times, fails to muster at least a single creative thought, while his entire ideas are described as part of another experience. Totally unprofessional and stupid.
I personally found Bioshock Infinite to be one of the most creative, thought provoking means of entertainment (yes, alongside films and books) in existence. People nowadays are so obsessed about shooting and guns that they forget there's a storyline. I find this to be the most important aspect of a videogame. I spent 4 hours talking with a friend of mine about the themes, metaphors and ending of Infinite. Nothing since the movie Mulholland Drive gave me this opportunity.
There's just so much heart put into Infinite's characters, so much naturalness, attention to little details, and everything is woven together in a fantastic world. Sure, it does not have the pressing, dark atmosphere of Rapture, but it didn't want that. The first two games were, in my opinion, a reference to political ideals and systems in their pure form, more of a social and cultural study, while Infinite is a dreamy, if more scientific take on a number of physical concepts borderlining sci-fi, all implemented flawlessly. I am actually very happy Infinite got stripped of the additional content included in earlier trailers- Ken Levine wanted to explain everything. And everything does make sense, if you stop to think about it and have the knowledge to do so. The way this guy blended all his scientific concepts with art, from perfectly fitted musical score to allusions to literature (Wizard of Oz comes to mind- the tornado scene), world religions, the cult of personality, human nature- everything is there if one has the eye to see it.
For instance, what this sad excuse for a 'reviewer' said, that the story refuses to explain situations the premise presents. I find this sad. First because it's obvious that he never read the game's title. Secondly, because everyone expects everything to be explained, done and solved for them, without the necessity of a single creative thought from themselves.
And you see, being different is great as long as you can sustain that objectively. Being different just for being differen't sake, now that's just to attract attention and hype. As long as that is obtained, the manner in which it's done is meaningless. As two examples, see Julian Assange's critique of The Fifth Estate or the newspaper which rated The Godfather 30. Guess what, without making any valid points. Just like this review.
@AlmostUndead @VercettiTommyy Just because you say "different from everything else" doesn't make it the right approach. Of course, we're talking here about something highly subjective and susceptible to interpretation, where it might be virtually impossible to come up with a clear concept of right and wrong.
I have to completely agree with you on the crowd point you made- it is indeed sad to see people thinking something because society wants them to. However, it does not mean that every individual from that crowd has gotten its idea that way.
I personally found Bioshock Infinite to be one of the most creative, thought provoking means of entertainment (yes, alongside films and books) in existence. People nowadays are so obsessed about shooting and guns that they forget there's a storyline. I find this to be the most important aspect of a videogame. I spent 4 hours talking with a friend of mine about the themes, metaphors and ending of Infinite. Nothing since the movie Mulholland Drive gave me this opportunity.
There's just so much heart put into Infinite's characters, so much naturalness, attention to little details, and everything is woven together in a fantastic world. Sure, it doesn not have the pressing, dark atmosphere of Rapture, but it didn't want that. The first two games were, in my opinion, a reference to political ideals and systems in their pure form, more of a social and cultural study, while Infinite is a dreamy, if more scientific take on a number of physical concepts borderlining sci-fi, all implemented flawlessly. I am actually very happy Infinite got stripped of the additional content you've mentioned- Ken Levine wanted to explain everything.The way this guy blended all his scientific concepts with art, from perfectly fitted musical score to allusions to literature (Wizard of Oz comes to mind- the tornado scene), world religions, the cult of personality, human nature- everything is there if one has the eye to see it.
For instance, what this "reviewer" said, that the story refuses to explain situations the premise presents. I find this sad. First because it's obvious that he never read the game's title. Secondly, because everyone expects everything to be explained, done and solved for them, without the necessity of a single creative thought from themselves.
And you see, being different is great as long as you can sustain that objectively. Being different just for being differen't sake, now that's just to attract attention and hype. As long as that is obtained, the manner in which it's done is meaningless. As two examples, see Julian Assange's critique of The Fifth Estate or the newspaper which rated The Godfather 30.
I still don't get it. Is this guy just a sad, brain-dead individual with no imagination or sense of finesse whatsoever, or is he just seeking attention, no matter the nature of it?
@tom2750 @VercettiTommyy @GLOK1132 @Chaloner11 I think they don't, though. Mouse allows for much more precise on-foot movements, faster reaction times and more natural movement.
VercettiTommyy's comments