158 réponses à ce sujet

[KT Chong]

A great game, but with the most convoluted self-indulgent story.

Seriously writers in the video game industry can't write.  Fortunately, poor story seldom diminsh great gameplay and execution.   A fun game with great gameplay does not really a good story.

Modifié par KT Chong, 31 mars 2013 - 07:09 .

[Isichar]

Just watched the ending and I am a bit confused. So does Booker only die in the worlds he accepted the Baptism? So the post credits ending mean there still exists timelines in which he was able to keep her?

[Sidney]

In Exile wrote...


The problem with that is that you just get the shooting your dad in the face timeparadox. If Comstock is erased from existence, then he never kidnaps Anna. There are two solutions: (i) time is linear and past changes don't impact future events, but in that case Elizabeth drowning Booker is useless; and (ii) this is contradicted in-game anyway when the various Elizabeths start to fade out of existence - clearly killing Booker erases their existence.

There are multiple realities. They all exist simultaneously unless something changes that. In this case you have Universe A and Universe B. A is no baptism and B is baptism. B creates Comstock and Liz. That reality exists alongisde A until something changes that snuffs B out of existence. Everything in B did exist at one point in time but that ends when the conditions that created it ended as well.

If I recall enough physics I think this is sort of the notion put forth in the Many Worlds Theories one of the proponents of whom is a man named Bryce DeWitt.

[Sidney]

In Exile wrote...

He seemed to know DeWitt in that segment, and was talking to your character as if he were a separate person from Comstock in his timeline. 

Two repsonses, but 2 different subjects didn't want it all in the same mass of text repsonse.....

Slate always treated Booker as a different man than Comstock. He clearly knows DeWitt since he served with him. My question is still if he knows that DeWitt is just another aspect of Comstock (or really the other way around) or if he doesn't know Comstock = DeWitt how are we suppposed to accept that?

[LTD]

One of the largest mysteries present has to do with the odd desire of people to add words " Discusion Thread" after topic title:o Considering tis an online forum where there is most always discusion and any and all of that discussion always happens in thread wtf is the point? I think there was a thread for new Assassin's Creed titled Official BSN Discusion Thread for AC4.

The fuk!


/offtopic!

Modifié par LTD, 31 mars 2013 - 03:09 .

[Whybother]

Blacklash93 wrote...
All answers to these questions are viable. It's admirably ambiguous and not something you see in videogames often. This isn't a cheap conclusion like ME3. It's deliberately open to multiple theories about what the last scenes really meant. Trying to impose one theory of how that last scene effect Booker and Elizabeth would be foolish, as multiverse logic is a very subjective one. I pick the most hopeful outcome theory, obviously.  I thought it was a satisfying conclusion for Booker and Elizabeth, but...

Just ambiguous is cheap.  Seriously.  Writing good ambiguous is difficult, but any writer can do some kind of cheap nonsensical nonsense and claim it's intentionally "ambiguous."

[OdanUrr]

Kathleen321 wrote...

I wasn't seriously upset by the ending.
However I just don't quite see why Booker dieing solves everything. Does he survive in the other universes? Every time I try to think about all the loose ends of a multilayered infinite story my head spins.
But maybe that is the point. Is "infinite" a concept that can be understood? I know people don't like being told they "can't understand and that is why it makes sense" because that is insulting. But infinite possibilities was kind of the theme. The problem is how does one action solve a problem in infinite realities? Can one action really stop all the chaos? it doesn't seriously trouble me compared to Mass Effect's ending but I can see why it bothers people.

If infinity is a concept that can't be understood, then it follows that the creators of BioShock don't understand the story they themselves created, doesn't it?

[SlottsMachine]

I for one welcome our new Time Lord.

[In Exile]

Sidney wrote...
There are multiple realities. They all exist simultaneously unless something changes that. In this case you have Universe A and Universe B. A is no baptism and B is baptism. B creates Comstock and Liz. That reality exists alongisde A until something changes that snuffs B out of existence.

The problem is when that "something" that wipes B out of existence is part of B. It would mean that B paradoxically wipes itself out of existence. The problem with Bioshock Infinite's plot is Elizabeth's erasing herself out of existence. The plot would work fine if she stuck around regardless of her zapping Booker. 

Slate always treated Booker as a different man than Comstock. He clearly knows DeWitt since he served with him. My question is still if he knows that DeWitt is just another aspect of Comstock (or really the other way around) or if he doesn't know Comstock = DeWitt how are we suppposed to accept that?

It gets worse when you think about it. Why would Slate even be on Columbia? Obviously because Comstock recruited him. And he knows Comstock was at Wounded Knee, and he sees Booker as a bona fide killer. So his view of Comstock is just batty. 

[Kronner]

I thought the ending was excellent and well explained.

I'd like to know more about Songbird, but I guess that's gonna be included in a DLC later on.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Heres a question, what happened to Comstock's Anna?

[OdanUrr]

DinoSteve wrote...

Heres a question, what happened to Comstock's Anna?

If Booker became Comstock, he didn't have a daughter.

[legion999]

Kronner wrote...

I thought the ending was excellent and well explained.

I'd like to know more about Songbird, but I guess that's gonna be included in a DLC later on.

Songbird was really underused but I'm not sure what DLC it could be in. Unless the DLC is about Booker and Elizabeth.

Also did anyone know what happened to that bounty hunter? Specifically the one who executed two Vox Populi members in one universe but sided with them in another?

[OdanUrr]

legion999 wrote...

Kronner wrote...

I thought the ending was excellent and well explained.

I'd like to know more about Songbird, but I guess that's gonna be included in a DLC later on.

Songbird was really underused but I'm not sure what DLC it could be in. Unless the DLC is about Booker and Elizabeth.

Also did anyone know what happened to that bounty hunter? Specifically the one who executed two Vox Populi members in one universe but sided with them in another?

I think he was killed. His picture was on a board with other Vox Populi who had also been killed.

[Sidney]

In Exile wrote...

The problem is when that "something" that wipes B out of existence is part of B. It would mean that B paradoxically wipes itself out of existence. The problem with Bioshock Infinite's plot is Elizabeth's erasing herself out of existence. The plot would work fine if she stuck around regardless of her zapping Booker.

It gets worse when you think about it. Why would Slate even be on Columbia? Obviously because Comstock recruited him. And he knows Comstock was at Wounded Knee, and he sees Booker as a bona fide killer. So his view of Comstock is just batty. 

The time stream thing isn't a big problem because there are many streams not a single time flow. If you exist you have the freedom to do anything. Liz exists at the moment she drowns Booker. There is no reason her actual self couldn't kill Booker at that point. She really does exist and there is nothing to stop it. It is only her action that unmakes her. Ending Comstock ends her.

There are theories of the multi-verse that say that Liz could still live on in the "killing" universe, in the past, because her existence has happened in another universe even without Comstock in this universe because an action in Universe B can't change an action in universe A. The game doesn't indicate that is happening given the disappearance of the other Lizes. 

Slate is to me the worst part of the game because I can't make him work right because he knows Booker. It would be different if he knew OF Booker by repuatation or something but everything he says sounds like a lot more than that.

[legion999]

Sidney wrote...

Slate is to me the worst part of the game because I can't make him work right because he knows Booker. It would be different if he knew OF Booker by repuatation or something but everything he says sounds like a lot more than that.

He knows Booker but not that Comstock is Booker. To him Comstock is a liar who never was at Wounded Knee while Booker actually was there.

[legion999]

OdanUrr wrote...

I think he was killed. His picture was on a board with other Vox Populi who had also been killed.

Even in the universe where the Vox Populi start a revolution?

[Sidney]

legion999 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Slate is to me the worst part of the game because I can't make him work right because he knows Booker. It would be different if he knew OF Booker by repuatation or something but everything he says sounds like a lot more than that.

He knows Booker but not that Comstock is Booker.

How? I know Booker as Comstock aged because of the Syphon but really Slate didn't recognize the man? 7th Cavalry wasn't that big a unit. This isn't like being in the Big Red 1 in WWII. And Booker wasn't just some other random trooper, he was a legend.

[legion999]

Sidney wrote...

legion999 wrote...

He knows Booker but not that Comstock is Booker.

How? I know Booker as Comstock aged because of the Syphon but really Slate didn't recognize the man? 7th Cavalry wasn't that big a unit. This isn't like being in the Big Red 1 in WWII. And Booker wasn't just some other random trooper, he was a legend.

Booker and Comstock don't look similar. They even sound different. And since I doubt the baptism was common knowledge I don't see how Slate would know.

[OdanUrr]

legion999 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

I think he was killed. His picture was on a board with other Vox Populi who had also been killed.

Even in the universe where the Vox Populi start a revolution?

I believe so, yes. Check the board in the police station.

[AtreiyaN7]

Dang it, I had a long post and accidentally hit the wrong key after reading two endings-related articles that I agreed with. *mutter*

I basically agree with the authors of the articles in http://venturebeat.c...ng-explanation/ and http://atthebuzzersh...t-it-all-means/

In trying to condense what I said, I think we have two groupings of universes that are tightly intertwined - multiverse A from which our Booker (and other Bookers) come from and multiverse B where Comstock, Anna/Elizabeth, and the Luteces come from. Events in BioShock Infinite involve the Lutece twins moving Bookers from multiverse A into multiverse B as part of their "experiment" to see if the loop that they're collectively stuck in can be broken (the song Will the Circle Be Unbroken? drove the point of trying to end an infinite loop home for me). "Our" Booker is just the latest in a long line of Bookers who have previously failed to engender true change for one reason or another.

The author(s) basically suggest that the ending and post-credit ending (together) amount to what I'll call multiverse C. In this new group of universes, Booker has made the choice to kill his other selves that would have become Comstock after being forced to confront and integrate the memories of his other selves.* As a result, Comstock is never there (in multiverse C) to steal Anna/Elizabeth, so baby Anna and Booker end up living a normal life (which is actually a happy ending if you think about it as one of the authors points out).

Everyone seems wrapped up in the quantum physics and whether or not the devs' interpretation of the many worlds hypothesis is "correct," but come on. I think people are getting too hung up on the technical details when you're perfectly free to riff on a scientific hypothesis in a game or novel and not be 100% scientifically accurate. Also, I think people are ignoring one important "constant" in the game: the fact that across the many universes and worlds, Booker's love for his daughter never wavered.

* NOTE (paragraph 2): The reason I mentioned this is because I think Anna/Elizabeth saw that other people who lived-died-lived generally went insane because they could not integrate the memories of their other selves. She likely wanted to prevent the Bookers in multiverse C from going insane and led him through memories of his choices until he could do what he had to do and accept the outcome.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 01 avril 2013 - 04:16 .

[Maria Caliban]

While I believe there are problems with the plot, the ending isn't one of them.

The game isn't following real world multiuniverse theories with its lighthouses any more than it's following real world genetic theory with its slugs that let you shoot fireballs. People need to stop thinking about the parallel universes as they learned them from Doctor Who or Star Trek, and listen to how people in the game explain what's happening.

However, do believe that Comstock was not originally Booker. If you follow the time line that would mean that Comstock got money for Lutece's research at the age of 16 and convinced Congress to let him be the governor of Columbia at the age of 19.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 01 avril 2013 - 05:41 .

[ejustinp]

Maria Caliban wrote...

The game isn't following real world multiuniverse theories with its lighthouses any more than it's following real world genetic theory with its slugs that let you shoot fireballs. People need to stop thinking about the parallel universes as they learned them from Doctor Who or Star Trek, and listen to how people in the game explain what's happening.

Exactly people seem to be IGNORING the information provided to them in the game. The game explains its rules for its multiverse and abides by them.

[George Costanza]

I'm surprised by some of the negativity towards the Bioshock Infinite ending. I thought the story was excellent, and made sense. I had no real issues with it at all. Few niggles. But otherwise, thoroughly enjoyable.

I've seen a few people complaining about Slate being a plot hole. I honestly don't understand how or why.

[legion999]

OdanUrr wrote...

legion999 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

I think he was killed. His picture was on a board with other Vox Populi who had also been killed.

Even in the universe where the Vox Populi start a revolution?

I believe so, yes. Check the board in the police station.

I somehow missed this giant chalk board with bold writing all over it. Thanks.