1470 réponses à ce sujet

[Clayless]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I'm pretty sure it was 'rationalized' with the whole 'constants and variables' thing. Booker is a constant. The baptism is a variable. Making the choice is a point of divergence. Going back in one reality to stop one Comstock does nothing but kill one Comstock. Elizabeth killed all Comstocks by going back to the epicenter, the point of divergence (the baptism) in every reality at once.

That's why you stop the epicenter from happening in the first place. If there's no point of divergence then there's no Comstock in any realities, as the events that led to his creation never happened.

[The Night Mammoth]

Except it only happens in one reality. Like Elizabeth said, there are still millions of other Comstocks, killing one is inconsequential on a wider scale.

No, I guess it doesn't matter, from the perspective of a single individual, that there are other realities, but Elizabeth sees all of them. So do Robert Lutece and Commander Shepard. It matters to them.

Hence, the return to the epicenter.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 14 mai 2013 - 03:36 .

[Mathias]

remydat wrote...

Mdoggy

Releasing a few extra minutes of footage and some still photos is not impact when all you guys are still mad. It's glorified lip service like me responding to my wife telling me to help around the house by picking up my dirty laundry off the floor and putting it in a waste basket and then sitting back down onbthe couch.

Like I said whether it had an impact remains to be seen.

For you.

We didn't get the impact a lot of us were hoping for, not yet at least. But an impact is an impact, and i'm counting this. I understand you thought it was subpar, but you can't ignore the people who were satisfied with things like the EC and Citadel DLC.  Also it wasn't just a "few" minutes of extra footage. It was A LOT more than that. I can't believe i'm defending the Extended Cut, but I gotta be fair here.

No impact would've been Bioware doing absolutely nothing. Yeah i'm not satisfied with what we got either, but i'm not gonna stand here and say "We changed nothing whatsover. In any shape or form. Nope. Nothing. I don't see any change." Because that would be false.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 14 mai 2013 - 03:31 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Robosexual wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I'm pretty sure it was 'rationalized' with the whole 'constants and variables' thing. Booker is a constant. The baptism is a variable. Making the choice is a point of divergence. Going back in one reality to stop one Comstock does nothing but kill one Comstock. Elizabeth killed all Comstocks by going back to the epicenter, the point of divergence (the baptism) in every reality at once.

That's why you stop the epicenter from happening in the first place. If there's no point of divergence then there's no Comstock in any realities, as the events that led to his creation never happened.

You can't stop the epicenter from happening, going back to stop Booker from being born would only stop one Booker, and one Comstock, from being created. By making sure no Booker accepts the baptism, no Comstocks are ever created, in any reality. It's a point of convergence, as well as divergence. 

[remydat]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

For you.

We didn't get the impact a lot of us were hoping for, not yet at least. But an impact is an impact, and i'm counting this. I understand you thought it was subpar, but you can't ignore the people who were satisfied with things like the EC and Citadel DLC.  Also it wasn't just a "few" minutes of extra footage. It was A LOT more than that. I can't believe i'm defending the Extended Cut, but I gotta be fair here.

No impact would've been Bioware doing absolutely nothing. Yeah i'm not satisfied with what we got either, but i'm not gonna stand here and say "We changed nothing whatsover. In any shape or form. Nope. Nothing. I don't see any change." Because that would be false.

Well of course for me, I am not giving someone else's opinion just my own.  Like I said, I could argue there was an impact when I picked up my dirty laundry and put it in the laundry basket but I hardly think that was what this hypothetical wife of mine was expecting.

If you want to say there was an impact for you then so be it.  I can't tell you what to be moved by or not.  I said and have always said there has been little impact IMO.

[Clayless]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

That's why you stop the epicenter from happening in the first place. If there's no point of divergence then there's no Comstock in any realities, as the events that led to his creation never happened.

You can't stop the epicenter from happening, going back to stop Booker from being born would only stop one Booker, and one Comstock, from being created. By making sure no Booker accepts the baptism, no Comstocks are ever created, in any reality. It's a point of convergence, as well as divergence. 

As you saw from the end only one Booker was stopped, yet it stopped all Comstocks. Stopping Booker from ever getting to the baptism would stop all Comstocks too. If the situation never happens then Comstock can never be created, there's no "you can't stop events from happening", as the entire end of the game is them stopping events from happening. By stopping them at an earlier point of convergence (Wounded Knee) you stop the divergence from ever happening.

[David7204]

BioShock Infinite doesn't really have to worry about plotholes. Because any time one comes up, they can just wave their hands and say "Quantum physics! It doesn't have to make sense!"

Assassin's Creed is of the same mold. Something doesn't make sense? Templers! Animus! Or Inception. Doesn't make sense? It's a dream. Doesn't have to make sense.

Well, that's great for them. But that really shouldn't be confused with good writing.

Modifié par David7204, 14 mai 2013 - 03:47 .

[Mathias]

Do we really have to discuss Bioshock Infinite in this topic?

[AresKeith]

Robosexual wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

That's why you stop the epicenter from happening in the first place. If there's no point of divergence then there's no Comstock in any realities, as the events that led to his creation never happened.

You can't stop the epicenter from happening, going back to stop Booker from being born would only stop one Booker, and one Comstock, from being created. By making sure no Booker accepts the baptism, no Comstocks are ever created, in any reality. It's a point of convergence, as well as divergence. 

As you saw from the end only one Booker was stopped, yet it stopped all Comstocks. Stopping Booker from ever getting to the baptism would stop all Comstocks too. If the situation never happens then Comstock can never be created, there's no "you can't stop events from happening", as the entire end of the game is them stopping events from happening. By stopping them at an earlier point of convergence (Wounded Knee) you stop the divergence from ever happening.

And you also saw Elizabeths from other realities too

[Archonsg]

@thenightmammoth

I do not think that is quite right.

Stephen Hawkins : Grandfather Paradox

If you stopped Bookers' birth.
Booker cease to exist in *all* universes.
To be even more certain, you could track Booker's family tree to its origins and then kill those great grand forebears. 
They die, no one down the line would even exist, hence no Booker.

Modifié par Archonsg, 14 mai 2013 - 03:47 .

[spirosz]

There is a Bioshock Infinite spoiler thread, just around the corner folks.

[Archonsg]

@Spirosz


We could always go back to;

Effing ending sucks. We *hate* you Casey Hudson!  

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

BioShock Infinite doesn't really have to worry about plotholes. Because any time one comes up, they can just wave their hands and say "Quantum physics! It doesn't have to make sense!"

Assassin's Creed is of the same mold. Something doesn't make sense? Templers! Animus! Or Inception. Doesn't make sense? It's a dream. Doesn't have to make sense.

Well, that's great for them. But that really shouldn't be confused with good writing.

Sounds similar to what happens around here, far too often, with the term "science-fiction". 

Doesn't make sense? Arthur C. Clarke says it doesn't have to.

[David7204]

Err...to explain Synthesis? That's about the only example I can think of.

[Clayless]

AresKeith wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

As you saw from the end only one Booker was stopped, yet it stopped all Comstocks. Stopping Booker from ever getting to the baptism would stop all Comstocks too. If the situation never happens then Comstock can never be created, there's no "you can't stop events from happening", as the entire end of the game is them stopping events from happening. By stopping them at an earlier point of convergence (Wounded Knee) you stop the divergence from ever happening.

And you also saw Elizabeths from other realities too

Who all stopped existing upon the death of Booker, as stopping Booker stopped all Comstocks and Elizabeths in every reality.

Stopping him at Wounded Knee would stop all Comstocks and Elizabeths too.

[Mathias]

Archonsg wrote...

@Spirosz


We could always go back to;

Effing ending sucks. We *hate* you Casey Hudson!  

At least that'd be on topic, and wouldn't run the risk of accidentally spoiling a game for people who haven't played it yet.

Come on guys, if you wanna coo over how much you love Bioshock Infinite please do it somewhere else.

[Archonsg]

Never liked Arthur C Clarke much anyways.

Always preferred Heinlein.

Modifié par Archonsg, 14 mai 2013 - 03:57 .

[Astartes Marine]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...
At least that'd be on topic, and wouldn't run the risk of accidentally spoiling a game for people who haven't played it yet.

Come on guys, if you wanna coo over how much you love Bioshock Infinite please do it somewhere else.

For those like myself, that was done long ago thanks to some bozo on this board who couldn't keep their mouth shut.  Short of editing all related posts the damage will be done here too.  <_<

[Archonsg]

I have learned long ago that short of locking myself in an emissions proof security room with no Internet access (*shudders*) you *will* be spoiled anytime from a week to several days *before* a game/movie /book is to be released.

Anything in the market for more than a month and there's no such thing as "spoiling" any more.

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

Err...to explain Synthesis? That's about the only example I can think of.

You know how discussion around here goes: it becomes a general conversation about unexplained or under-explained tech, usually sparked over the ending (the Crucible, Synthesis, the ability to access the Reapers' databank of knowledge, how Reapers are even made, etc.).

[The Heretic of Time]

spirosz wrote...

Yes I have, especially when you get a chance to compare anything to the Witcher series and it's quality.

The Witcher is indeed high quality, very high.

But that's not the same as:

spirosz wrote...

you express yourself as having superior gaming taste.  

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 14 mai 2013 - 04:32 .

[The Heretic of Time]

Robosexual wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

As you saw from the end only one Booker was stopped, yet it stopped all Comstocks. Stopping Booker from ever getting to the baptism would stop all Comstocks too. If the situation never happens then Comstock can never be created, there's no "you can't stop events from happening", as the entire end of the game is them stopping events from happening. By stopping them at an earlier point of convergence (Wounded Knee) you stop the divergence from ever happening.

And you also saw Elizabeths from other realities too

Who all stopped existing upon the death of Booker, as stopping Booker stopped all Comstocks and Elizabeths in every reality.

Stopping him at Wounded Knee would stop all Comstocks and Elizabeths too.

Killing Booker at Wounded Knee makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Doing that would erase Booker (how he is now) and his daughter Anna too. Why would you want to do that? I don't want Booker or Anna to be gone, I only want Comstock to be gone.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 14 mai 2013 - 04:36 .

[The Heretic of Time]

David7204 wrote...

BioShock Infinite doesn't really have to worry about plotholes. Because any time one comes up, they can just wave their hands and say "Quantum physics! It doesn't have to make sense!"

Assassin's Creed is of the same mold. Something doesn't make sense? Templers! Animus! Or Inception. Doesn't make sense? It's a dream. Doesn't have to make sense.

Well, that's great for them. But that really shouldn't be confused with good writing.

You're saying BioShock Infinite and Inception aren't fine examples of marvelous writing? No, worse, you're implying BioShock Infinite and Inception are poorly written. Is that what you're saying?

[dreamgazer]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

You're saying BioShock Infinite and Inception aren't fine examples of marvelous writing? No, worse, you're implying BioShock Infinite and Inception are poorly written. Is that what you're saying?

He wouldn't be the first one to say that about Inception, unfortunately. 

The world of movie geeks is just as fickle as the world of game geeks.

[Clayless]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Who all stopped existing upon the death of Booker, as stopping Booker stopped all Comstocks and Elizabeths in every reality.

Stopping him at Wounded Knee would stop all Comstocks and Elizabeths too.

Killing Booker at Wounded Knee makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Doing that would erase Booker (how he is now) and his daughter Anna too. Why would you want to do that? I don't want Booker or Anna to be gone, I only want Comstock to be gone.

You wouldn't need to kill him at Wounded Knee, just stop him from joining the 7th Cavalry.

Also Anna stops existing at the end of Infinite. Booker dies before she was conceived.