Support NeoGAF

[Readvacancy]

So do the nosebleeds happen because he is struggling to remember something or is it because he is where he isn't suppose to be?

 

[Noray]

It makes me laugh because the coin flip happens what, like an hour or two into the game. How has it taken them 122 tries to get him to that scene without a death? Seems like Booker is an imcompetent fellow too.

That doesn't mean he died before the coin flip, it means Booker PASSED that point 122 times and did the the coin flip. They tally the amount of times it landed heads, remember? So he had to have flipped the coin. He had to have had flipped. He flipped.

Coins.

 

[PeterVenkman]

So do the nosebleeds happen because he is struggling to remember something or is it because he is where he isn't suppose to be?

THIS, the nosebleeds are one of the things i still feel foggy about. It feels like it's when you're remembering or not remembering something from an alternate universe

 

[jacksepticeye]

Something I noticed is that in the E3 demo Elizabeth seems to have difficulties opening/controlling the tears yet in the game she's just trowing them left and right like it's nothing. It feels like a huge part of the narrative that was cut.

That was something that annoyed me, it made combat a bit too easy at times. She could keep opening tear after tear with no penalty and she could even open up turrets again after they had been destroyed. I wish it was still like the E3 demo where she had a cool down period and you had to choose wisely which tear to open to best suit your combat tactics.
Just opening one after another as you saw fit made them feel less important and were a crutch to fall back on rather than a vital tool to use like they were advertised

So do the nosebleeds happen because he is struggling to remember something or is it because he is where he isn't suppose to be?

Nosebleeds are because his brain has remembered something from before that it shouldn't. When he goes through tears his mind makes up a story for him to understand and creates false memories to try get his head around what happened, but when he suddenly remembers something from a tear before that his mind gets conflicted of what's real or not and his nose bleeds.

LOST did a similar thing in the "constant" episode, when you time travel. If you fail to grab onto a constant or something that's real you will get conflicting opinions of what's real, past or present.

 

[Noray]

So do the nosebleeds happen because he is struggling to remember something or is it because he is where he isn't suppose to be?

It's when new memories are mixing with old memories. There's such a strong cognitive dissonance the mind can't handle it and it causes a physical reaction, just like with the dead soldiers. First time he gets a nose bleed is when Comstock mentions Anna to Booker, and he's remembering her, but he doesn't quite know what he's remembering yet, because in the universe he's in, Comstock never had Anna. He can't make anything of it so I think he assumes Anna died in childbirth, as he implies to Elizabeth later on on the boardwalk when he tells her his wife died in childbirth.

 

[Apophenia Overload]

It saddens me that there are quite a few people here who just don't like the story/ending because it isn't palatable to their tastes (which is entirely fair) or because it isn't what they were expecting. It's so well done.

People, especially gamers, take their tastes way too seriously. They take their likes and dislikes and make it part of their characterization, part of who they are as a person. Why does it sadden you that people disagree with the prevailing opinion of the supposed excellence of this game? Why can't we dissent? Indeed, we must dissent.

 

[Sorian]

That doesn't mean he died before the coin flip, it means Booker PASSED that point 122 times and did the the coin flip. They tally the amount of times it landed heads, remember? So he had to have flipped the coin. He had to have had flipped. He flipped.

Coins.

Haha good call, silly me. I look at what I said now and feel stupid

 

[FlutterPuffs]

Wait. Am I the only one who thinks that Lady Comstock and Elizabeth is the same person?

I mean the universe must always have a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. In my opinion in that universe Lady Comstock IS Elizabeth.

Sort of explains on why we don't see a picture of DeWitt's wife anywhere. She wasn't that important (to the story).

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

People, especially gamers, take their tastes way too seriously. They take their likes and dislikes and make it part of their characterization, part of who they are as a person. Why does it sadden you that people disagree with the prevailing opinion of the supposed excellence of this game? Why can't we dissent? Indeed, we must dissent.

Because hyperbole that usually generates or is used (in both sides of the argument).

 

[jacksepticeye]

That doesn't mean he died before the coin flip, it means Booker PASSED that point 122 times and did the the coin flip. They tally the amount of times it landed heads, remember? So he had to have flipped the coin. He had to have had flipped. He flipped.

Coins.

He does die before the coin flip, he gets drowned by the priest during the baptism at the start. hat's why he's in the office again going through the door, the coin flips are spot checks to see whether this booker will pass that test and continue on and see if he makes the same choice. If he does (which as a player he always will) then they let him progress.

He also dies after your first encounter with songbird and he goes back to the office and then wakes up on the beach, and then what do ya know, 2 mins later they force you to make a choice between bird and cage again.Also notice he's met Liz before he dies here and she ends up in the office this time and she's not there the first time.

At least that's how I saw it. They wouldn't have the office black and white scene as a reminder of every time you die in battle if they were just gonna change it's purpose at different parts of the game. It's confusing enough without that.

Wait. Am I the only one who thinks that Lady Comstock and Elizabeth is the same person?

I mean the universe must always have a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. In my opinion in that universe Lady Comstock IS Elizabeth.

Sort of explains on why we don't see a picture of DeWitt's wife anywhere. She wasn't that important (to the story).

I don't think they're the same person. It messes up a lot of shit then like how he was married to his own daughter

 

[Pavaloo]

So why was Lady Comstock all ghost powerful and stuff? I didn't quite get that part. I get that she was a representation of what Elizabeth thought she was like (very angry), but that's about all I got.

 

[Sorian]

Wait. Am I the only one who thinks that Lady Comstock and Elizabeth is the same person?

I mean the universe must always have a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. In my opinion in that universe Lady Comstock IS Elizabeth.

Sort of explains on why we don't see a picture of DeWitt's wife anywhere. She wasn't that important (to the story).

I don't think you could walk 20 feet during the first 3 hours of the game without seeing a portrait of Lady Comstock. Personally, I can't get behind the whole Elizabeth is Lady Comstock thing. Where would she have come from? As far as we know, Lady Comstock didn't come from another reality, she is where she is supposed to be. How would she have been born? If Comstock only needed his "seed", why did he take Lady Comstock (who according to the theory, is his seed) and start banging her to have another child?

Edit: Just saw you said DeWitt's wife, sorry My point still stands for the second half though.

 

[Klendathu Club Owner]

I think many people have made very articulate critcisms that go far beyond taste. This is not akin to a "I don't like chocolate ice cream" debate.

I am pretty much your antithesis in that it saddens me to so many people think this is a great narrative. It may be just the literature teacher in me, but it honestly makes me concerned that a generation of kids could grow up having never read a substantial amount of good literature and therefore have no idea what a well developed narrative even is because their idea of narratives are derived from videogames. It makes me feel bad kind of bad about my hobby and I don't like to feel bad about my hobby.

I'm a teacher too and a substantial amount of my students only read longer works of fiction if it's required for school. So I understand where you're coming from, but I didn't read "good" literature for fun when I grew up either. In my freetime I mostly read fantasy and Star Wars novels. And as a fifteen year old boy I'd probably think that Infinite's story was the best thing ever.
But I still ended up reading and loving a lot of good literature later on. And even if Infinite's story ultimately falls flat I still think it's commendable that games exist that at least try to do more with the narrative. And not in a niche genre but in THE mainstream genre. So I'd look at video game narratives a bit more optimistic: Maybe it serves as a gateway for some people who otherwise wouldn't be interested in literature at all.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

You don't play as a single Booker through the course of the game, though. In fact, you die relatively early (at the baptism before you enter Columbia, and then again when you first encounter Songbird).

Goddamn, I hadn't realised this but now that you've mentioned it, it makes perfect sense.

Oh shit, time for a replay I think. I need to keep an eye out for all the little touches, nods, etc this time around. I was too engrossed in the world the first time that I clearly missed a lot of little touches.

BTW, did anyone manage to collect all 80 voxophones in their first playthrough? I explored as much as I possibly could and still only ended up finding 70. rather annoying how ell hidden some of them are. Same goes for the infusions. I missed so many even though I thought I explored every single nook and cranny.

 

[jacksepticeye]

So why was Lady Comstock all ghost powerful and stuff? I didn't quite get that part. I get that she was a representation of what Elizabeth thought she was like (very angry), but that's about all I got.

That's it. Comstock uses a siphon to conjure Lady Comstock and she ends up being a physical manifestation of what Liz thought of her, which was just angry thoughts.

 

[PeterVenkman]

He does die before the coin flip, he gets drowned by the priest during the baptism at the start. hat's why he's in the office again going through the door, the coin flips are spot checks to see whether this booker will pass that test and continue on and see if he makes the same choice. If he does (which as a player he always will) then they let him progress.

He also dies after your first encounter with songbird and he goes back to the office and then wakes up on the beach, and then what do ya know, 2 mins later they force you to make a choice between bird and cage again.Also notice he's met Liz before he dies here and she ends up in the office this time and she's not there the first time.

At least that's how I saw it. They wouldn't have the office black and white scene as a reminder of every time you die in battle if they were just gonna change it's purpose at different parts of the game. It's confusing enough without that.
I don't think they're the same person. It messes up a lot of shit then like how he was married to his own daughter

I still see this Booker as "Booker 122" - same one through the whole game, he's just the first one to break the loop

 

[The One Who Knocks]

Wait. Am I the only one who thinks that Lady Comstock and Elizabeth is the same person?

I mean the universe must always have a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. In my opinion in that universe Lady Comstock IS Elizabeth.

Sort of explains on why we don't see a picture of DeWitt's wife anywhere. She wasn't that important.

This isn't possible. In red universe Comstock marries her (she is also extremely devoted to him) and becomes sterile due to the machine. Comstock murders his political opposition and she realises it which makes her question Comstock's divinity. Comstock attempted to have a child with her to allow Columbia to survive but was unable to do so due to being rendered sterile; he never realised he was sterile and asked for an affair with the female Lutece who declined. He used the Lutece's machine to take Anna, his child from an alternative universe, whose mother died during childbirth, to him. Lady Comstock made the obvious assumption that Comstock had an affair with the female Lutece and, even after they explained the reality, she could barely accept it; she concludes that Comstock is a monster. Comstock begs her for her silence since she is able to shatter the entire facade that he has created but, being both highly religious and highly moral, she cannot promise him silence (which would not lead to attonement) but only forgiveness. This promise sets into motion almost the entire chain of events as it forces Comstock to murder both her and the Luteces (which Fink attempts to make look like an accident by sabotaging the machine and trapping them in the timeline). This murder then frames Daisy Fitzroy who then leads the Vox. If Elizabeth is Lady Comstock you end up with an entire host of paradoxes, conflicting memories and more. In addition to this, the time period is consistent in both sets of universes which is why both Bookers are the same age. If Elizabeth is Lady Comstock then Lady Comstock must come from a completely different set of universes and it means that Comstock tried to have a child with his child so stole his child to have a child, killing his wife/child because she didn't accept the origins of his child which she herself came from. A much more likely explanation is:

In the Booker-verse his wife dies in childbirth. In the Comstock-verse there is no childbirth to kill her. I assumed that they are the same woman in each verse. This explains why they look alike.

 

[Sorian]

Goddamn, I hadn't realised this but now that you've mentioned it, it makes perfect sense.

Oh shit, time for a replay I think. I need to keep an eye out for all the little touches, nods, etc this time around. I was too engrossed in the world the first time that I clearly missed a lot of little touches.

BTW, did anyone manage to collect all 80 voxophones in their first playthrough? I explored as much as I possibly could and still only ended up finding 70. rather annoying how ell hidden some of them are. Same goes for the infusions. I missed so many even though I thought I explored every single nook and cranny.

I finished with 76 out of 80 diaries. I feel like I searched everywhere too but this always happens to me in games. I always think I'm going to find everything and then I just barely come up short.

 

[jacksepticeye]

I still see this Booker as "Booker 122" - same one through the whole game, he's just the first one to break the loop

Then why show us the office scene after certain parts? The office is very definitely meant to show you what happens after Booker dies as when you die in battle you end up there, starting everything again as another Booker. It wouldn't make sense to change the meaning behind the office at different points

 

[nbthedude]

I didn't mean to imply that the narrative is ironclad or anything, it does require suspension of disbelief here and there, and some willingness to let the story handwave certain things (like, shouldn't Liz/Anna be drowning the original Booker at the end, those kinds of questions).

What do you think is bad about the narrative? I apologize if you've posted it and I missed it, but there are many posts in this thread.

I don't think it is terrible. It is certainly more interesting than most videogame stories for sure. I just kind of grimmace when people refer to it as a "great" narrative. I have talked about various points that bother me throughout this thread but I can consolidate:

1) The game is unfocused, tonally and thematically.

It simultaneously seems to want to be a social satire of American fundementalism, a personal relationship of a father-daughter relationship, and a science fiction story about how the concept of parallel universes impacts our concept of moral responsibility. I teach literature for a living and if one of my students came to me and told me they wanted to create a story with all those elements I would probably tell them they need to slow down and pick one because even tonally those elements distract from one another and you it is very unlikely that you will be able to develop all of them sufficiently. Instead they serve to distract from one another.

2) The personal interactions between the main characters are shallow.

Elizabeth's interactions with you mainly consist of her finding something you did disagreeable and then running away. Then you shoot a bunch of things and find her and the conflict goes away without really being discussed. Most of the time Booker might as well be a silent protagonist because his statements to Elizabeth mostly amount to "I'm sorry" followed by prompts to "Press X to console" (the new "Press X to Jason"). The revelation that Booker is her father is a good example of this. The characters react in an almost nonchalant manner when the issue is brought to the forefront.

3) The narrative is delivered in a very disorganized fashion.

The opening 20 minutes of the game establish amazing ambiance. The last 20 minutes is a giant info dump. Key information about major characters actions and relationships is delivered through tiny sound bytes that are broken up and spread around the world in the tape recorders. This would be find if it just filled in the details, but important information to even making sense of the plot is delivered in these tapes and are miss able. I had to go to a wikia to find out what exactly the twin's role was in Booker's narrative because the main narrative doesn't explain it despite how important this information is. The "amnesia" device from the tears is not only a convenient way to deliver a "ta da!" plot twist at the end, it also makes much of the narrative needlessly confusing and unreliable. When you are telling a story this complex with multiple timelines and spanning 30 years+ of history in a 13 hour game primarily about shooting dudes, an unreliable narrator and false memories are very stupid things to do. They just obfuscate your story needlessly.

4) The narrative has contradictions that don't make sense when analyzed.

I realize that you are always going to have this problem to some degree when dealing with time travel and multiple universes, but the key moment in the entire game--the baptismal scene at the end, literally makes no sense. Not only is it a bit absurd to imagine that the future daughter travels back in time to drown her father while bystanders look on (let alone an infinite number of Elizabeths all conspire to go back and drown an infinite number of Bookers), it doesn't even make chronological sense. If Comstock never existed (ie. Booker was drowned) then there was no one to give the baby Elizabeth to. As some other posters have recommended, we could view this scene as metaphoric, but metaphoric for what is the question. I literally have no idea what was suppose to be literally happening with that baptismal scene. There are similar problems in other aspects of the narrative.

5) Elizabeth is used to as a crutch explain information to the player that she would have no reason to know.

It's a neat device in a way. Rather than having an on screen prompt, Elizabeth gives teh player directions or explains narrative events but the game never makes much of an effort to explain how she knows all the stuff she knows. She basically just becomes a box that Levine can use to dump whatever he wants the player to know. It's a cheap device akin to the authorial voice over in a film. Sometimes that kind of device can be used successfully to accentuate a narrative, but it often becomes a crutch by a writer to explain in an inelegant way things they want the audience to know rather than integrating that information into the actual narrative.

 

[PeterVenkman]

Then why show us the office scene after certain parts? The office is very definitely meant to show you what happens after Booker dies as when you die in battle you end up there, starting everything again as another Booker. It wouldn't make sense to change the meaning behind the office at different points

Unless Elizabeth is there during battle, in which case she revives you and not the office. You could go with it either way. The office also shows up plenty of other times towards the end when Liz takes you there, but I don't think you die every time in those instances.

EDIT: Though given infinite universes, I'm sure there were plenty of Bookers, 1-121, who did die during those instances.

 

[Pavaloo]

That's it. Comstock uses a siphon to conjure Lady Comstock and she ends up being a physical manifestation of what Liz thought of her, which was just angry thoughts.

So can Liz just create any version of a person? And why was Lady Comstock able to revive the dead and fly around? When they said they were going to bring her back, I was picturing she'd turn up in the world like Mr. Lin not knowing what to do.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I finished with 76 out of 80 diaries. I feel like I searched everywhere too but this always happens to me in games. I always think I'm going to find everything and then I just barely come up short.

6 more than me. I assume they don't carry over to any new playthrough? I don't mind picking them all up again, but it's going to make it harder to know which ones are new and which aren't.

If I had to guess, I'd say the remaining hidden ones are behind hidden Vox Populi walls. I only came across three in my entire playthrough, I assume there's more?

 

[Metroidvania]

I've said a lot in this thread about how the universe tries to consider Comstock and Booker two different people when they really aren't (the whole born again thing). Everyone who receives info from another dimension self talks about how it isn't a perfect process where the memories just both show up and you have to make heads or tails of it. A lot of them complain about how the memories start trying to delete each other and large chunks of memory are just completely gone until something can trigger the memory to come back. Hell, the whole premise of Booker is to show that when these chunks disappear, the brain attempts to piece the info together itself. He may not have gotten the sterility memory verbatem but he did get the overlap of he had a chld but did not have a child. Without anything else there to connect, it makes sense to think that the brain would connect those by saying "I had a child but the baby died during birth." It's really the only logical conclusion that a normal person could draw. Obviously, logic wasn;t the correct answer here but it's all you have at the time.

I suppose, and some clarification on the nosebleed issue (I thought it was due simply to an alternate 'you' dying in another universe, which is why I was a bit confused on how Booker's dripping several times) did help. Still, it actively 'hides' the fact from you without studying several voxophones on how the memory process works, as the in-game explanation of Player Booker receiving Vox martyr Booker's memories is handled the same way time travel is in Looper. Liz just says "come back to me", and that's that.

Wait. Am I the only one who thinks that Lady Comstock and Elizabeth is the same person?

I mean the universe must always have a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. In my opinion in that universe Lady Comstock IS Elizabeth.

Elizabeth isn't a constant. Anna is a consequence of the variable of Booker not getting baptized. When he does get baptized, (at least in the timelines we care about), Comstock always becomes sterile due to radiation from the tear machines.

Sort of explains on why we don't see a picture of DeWitt's wife anywhere. She wasn't that important (to the story).

We probably don't have a picture because she probably looks quite similar to Liz, or to Lady Comstock if the parallels of the two universes match in that regard.

I think those mandatory moments are simply the working of Booker's mind/memory as he tries to remember what happened prior to being brought over. Likewise, every other time there is a change after a death we see, we always see precisely what changed to prevent the death. In those, we don't. That's not to say it's not a possibility but I don't think it's as likely as it may initially seem.

Yeah, I agree with this. With in-game deaths, you see Booker 'rewound' to before the event happened. It's a mixture of game mechanics (punishing death) mixing with story-directed reasons for it. With cut-scene flashbacks where you suddenly wake up with no real exposition on how you survived (i.e. waking up in the garden after the baptism drowning in the beginning), it seemed more like a continuous buildup to the 'twists', not separate Booker's starting over.

Plus, like you said, Liz shows up in the cutscene office moments, implying that deep down, in some memory form, Booker knows of a potential connection, or is at least making a parallel between Anna and Liz with the "bring the girl, wipe the debt" phrase.

 

[The One Who Knocks]

Then why show us the office scene after certain parts? The office is very definitely meant to show you what happens after Booker dies as when you die in battle you end up there, starting everything again as another Booker. It wouldn't make sense to change the meaning behind the office at different points

Because each point Booker is 'knocked out' and we see the workings of his memory (it's a flashback at these points). That's why immediately after the first one, we see his new memory of New York burning received from Comstock. Because the two Bookers in this universe didn't share events, the new Booker (the player)'s memories get overwritten/suppressed/contest each other and we see the formation of his memories. The story segments are us seeing what he is beginning to remember at each point. When Booker dies, the only person in the room would be him and the Luteces outside the door. In these memories, the Luteces comes into the room and Booker creates the narrative that he has to give them Elizabeth (as she appears after Battleship Bay) and then in the next has to go into the other room to give Anna. If you can check the date in the room, you could confirm that this is the date when Anna is given away. When he dies, we see the date when the Luteces make contact to Booker again (but we never see the actual 'date' because we're confined to the door, unable to turn around and see that the office is 'empty'.

In addition, each time we see Booker die, we always see the change that occurs. Perhaps he died at these points in a different universe, but we never saw it because if we played through his death, we never saw the change that occurs to prevent it. As a result, we'd be playing through a failed Booker (dies at baptism), skipping to a Booker that succeeds (passes baptism) and never seeing what the difference was that prevented him drowning.

EDIT: Since this is also being discussed, hre's the chalkboard with the numbering prior to flipping the coin (another dash is added to the front of it after you flip the coin). This is the 123rd, there has been 122 flips.

 

[nbthedude]

I'm a teacher too and a substantial amount of my students only read longer works of fiction if it's required for school. So I understand where you're coming from, but I didn't read "good" literature for fun when I grew up either. In my freetime I mostly read fantasy and Star Wars novels. And as a fifteen year old boy I'd probably think that Infinite's story was the best thing ever.
But I still ended up reading and loving a lot of good literature later on. And even if Infinite's story ultimately falls flat I still think it's commendable that games exist that at least try to do more with the narrative. And not in a niche genre but in THE mainstream genre. So I'd look at video game narratives a bit more optimistic: Maybe it serves as a gateway for some people who otherwise wouldn't be interested in literature at all.

I don't disagree with anything you just said. Even my own intellectual development was very similar (Gamefan and Timothy Zahn for me). And you have a point in terms of the game trying to be a big budget mainstream game. It certainly reaches for more than most mainstream games attempt. I just think it tries to do too much and is underdeveloped as a result.

I definitely still find it weird, compelling and interesting, which is more than you can say of most game narratives. I just wince a bit when people call it a "great story" or a "great narrative."

 

[FlutterPuffs]

I don't think you could walk 20 feet during the first 3 hours of the game without seeing a portrait of Lady Comstock. Personally, I can't get behind the whole Elizabeth is Lady Comstock thing. Where would she have come from? As far as we know, Lady Comstock didn't come from another reality, she is where she is supposed to be. How would she have been born? If Comstock only needed his "seed", why did he take Lady Comstock (who according to the theory, is his seed) and start banging her to have another child?

No, I mean a picture of DeWitt's wife not Lady Comstock.

For me it's due to the following factors:

• There must always be a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. For some reason the Elizabeths will always wear the same style of clothing (seen on Elizabeth, Lady Comstock and Little Sisters)
  
• I guess the reason why he took Elizabeth is because he wanted a daughter of her own. Could explain why he took Elizabeth; he probably couldn't conceive with Lady Compston.
  
• The door mistook Elizabeth as Lady Compston because she was the same exact match for her.

Note that I'm alright with been proven wrong though

 

[jacksepticeye]

Unless Elizabeth is there during battle, in which case she revives you and not the office. You could go with it either way. The office also shows up plenty of other times towards the end when Liz takes you there, but I don't think you die every time in those instances.

EDIT: Though given infinite universes, I'm sure there were plenty of Bookers, 1-121, who did die during those instances.

Because she tears you back to the past to show you what the purpose of the office really means. Liz doesn't revive you from death, she just brings you back from the brink of death. The times you go to the office you most definitely die, opening the door either symbolises going through a tear right abck to that point in time up to your death or it symbolises that Booker starting everything again and they skip it all for gameplay reasons.

Think of it this way, you flip the coin and get 122 heads or 123 I can't remember the counts. Then later in the game you die and that new Booker does all the stuff you just did up to that point in time. But we don't see him flip the coin so he could be number 123, we just don't get to see it.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

6 more than me. I assume they don't carry over to any new playthrough? I don't mind picking them all up again, but it's going to make it harder to know which ones are new and which aren't.

If I had to guess, I'd say the remaining hidden ones are behind hidden Vox Populi walls. I only came across three in my entire playthrough, I assume there's more?

Voxophones do carry over. So does the sightseeing points in the game.

Infusions do not.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Because each point Booker is 'knocked out' and we see the workings of his memory (it's a flashback at these points). That's why immediately after the first one, we see his new memory of New York burning received from Comstock. Because the two Bookers in this universe didn't share events, the new Booker (the player)'s memories get overwritten/suppressed/contest each other and we see the formation of his memories. The story segments are us seeing what he is beginning to remember at each point. When Booker dies, the only person in the room would be him and the Luteces outside the door. In these memories, the Luteces comes into the room and Booker creates the narrative that he has to give them Elizabeth (as she appears after Battleship Bay) and then in the next has to go into the other room to give Anna. If you can check the date in the room, you could confirm that this is the date when Anna is given away. When he dies, we see the date when the Luteces make contact to Booker again (but we never see the actual 'date' because we're confined to the door, unable to turn around and see that the office is 'empty'.

In addition, each time we see Booker die, we always see the change that occurs. Perhaps he died at these points in a different universe, but we never saw it because if we played through his death, we never saw the change that occurs to prevent it. As a result, we'd be playing through a failed Booker (dies at baptism), skipping to a Booker that succeeds (passes baptism) and never seeing what the difference was that prevented him drowning.

But you could see it both ways then, because the date he gives away Anna is when his story starts and he gets pulled through the tear to go to Columbia. Starting everything again. That scene about New York burning however doesn't fit into my explanation alright but it shouldn't fit into yours either because Comstock is dead before that takes place, doesn't he? so he wouldn't know about it either

I just don't understand why they would show the office scene as part of you dying in gameplay and then change it to Booker's memories as part of the story. It changes the mechanic

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

Eh... Nbthedude, half of your complains are pretty subjective (specially with the Booker realizing that is Elizabeth father...) or are thing you need to deal in videogame narrative.

 

[PeterVenkman]

Because she tears you back to the past to show you what the purpose of the office really means. Liz doesn't revive you from death, she just brings you back from the brink of death. The times you go to the office you most definitely die, opening the door either symbolises going through a tear right abck to that point in time up to your death or it symbolises that Booker starting everything again and they skip it all for gameplay reasons.

Think of it this way, you flip the coin and get 122 heads or 123 I can't remember the counts. Then later in the game you die and that new Booker does all the stuff you just did up to that point in time. But we don't see him flip the coin so he could be number 123, we just don't get to see it.

I mean that interpretation works fine, I just read the offices as flashbacks, like The One Who Knocks explained (much more thoroughly than I could).

 

[The One Who Knocks]

But you could see it both ways then, because the date he gives away Anna is when his story starts and he gets pulled through the tear to go to Columbia. Starting everything again. That scene about New York burning however doesn't fit into my explanation alright but it shouldn't fit into yours either because Comstock is dead before that takes place, doesn't he? so he wouldn't know about it either

No, the date he gives Anna is different to the date he goes to Columbia, otherwise Elizabeth would be the same age as Anna. The Luteces contact him 20 years later (or whatever the difference is between Anna's age and Elizabeth's is). EDIT: Actually, reading again, I'm not sure this is the same as what you're saying so in case it isn't, the story starts at the baptism technically (because that starts the chain of events leading to Anna being bought), not when Anna is bought. When Anna is bought, it is extremely significant to Booker, that's when he 'brings [them] the girl, wipe away the debt' but then immediately regrets this decision as he chases and, this causes him to live in regret. Later on, the Luteces meet Booker again and offer him a chance to save Anna buy dragging him into the red universe (sorry, Fringe colours) and take her back, at which point he forms his new memories (because the two version of Bookers did not share memories and thus they have different memories) based around selling Anna, not around Booker meeting the Letuces.

And the vision fits into mine because that is a memory, Comstock had the vision through a tear prior to buying Anna which means when Booker is pulled through later after meeting the Luteces again he too can remember it (it's not suppressed due to the significance of the memory to Comstock, just like "bring us the girl, wipe away the debt" is significant to Booker and isn't forgotten either).

 

[spirity]

We can afford to do this all day. The question is, can you?

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Voxophones do carry over. So does the sightseeing points in the game.

Infusions do not.

That is fantastic news. Thanks!

 

[jacksepticeye]

I mean that interpretation works fine, I just read the offices as flashbacks, like The One Who Knocks explained (much more thoroughly than I could).

Perhaps it works for both and perhaps that's the point of it. But then again that flash forward to New York burning doesn't fit into my explanation.

But I don't like the idea of the significance of the office scene changing throughout the game having conflicting meanings.

 

[-COOLIO-]

deaths seem to mean a looped booker so that 123 is only until you start dying.

 

[Sorian]

I suppose, and some clarification on the nosebleed issue (I thought it was due simply to an alternate 'you' dying in another universe, which is why I was a bit confused on how Booker's dripping several times) did help. Still, it actively 'hides' the fact from you without studying several voxophones on how the memory process works, as the in-game explanation of Player Booker receiving Vox martyr Booker's memories is handled the same way time travel is in Looper. Liz just says "come back to me", and that's that.

I believe the nosebleed comes from radically different memories entering your mind as compared to what you think you know. At first I thought it was only when you were supposed to be dead as well but thinking you are supposed to be dead is also a radically different memory so it still works.

No, I mean a picture of DeWitt's wife not Lady Comstock.

For me it's due to the following factors:

• There must always be a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. For some reason the Elizabeths will always wear the same style of clothing (seen on Elizabeth, Lady Comstock and Little Sisters)
  
• I guess the reason why he took Elizabeth is because he wanted a daughter of her own. Could explain why he took Elizabeth; he probably couldn't conceive with Lady Compston.
  
• The door mistook Elizabeth as Lady Compston because she was the same exact match for her.

Note that I'm alright with been proven wrong though

About the picture, yeah, check my edit. I threw it in there earlier when I re-read your post.

1) Without Lady Comstock being Elizabeth, there is always a DeWitt and an Elizabeth. Comstock will always steal Anna from another version of himself. This is a constant in the story.

2) This is my point though. If he wanted a daughter of his own, what was wrong with Lady Comstock if she was Elizabeth? Unless you think that in the Comstock timelines, Elizabeth still existed without being Booker's daughter but that is a stretch IMO. I think she has to be his daughter.

3) The door mistook Elizabeth for Lady Comstock but that is it. I would argue that Booker and Comstock found the same women in their respective realities so Elizabeth would have a resemblence to the person who would be her mother in another reality. If they were the same exact person, the door would have opened when Liz scanned her hand.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

We can afford to do this all day. The question is, can you?

LMAO.

This game just keeps on giving.

 

[jacksepticeye]

No, the date he gives Anna is different to the date he goes to Columbia, otherwise Elizabeth would be the same age as Anna. The Luteces contact him 20 years later (or whatever the difference is between Anna's age and Elizabeth's is). EDIT: Actually, reading again, I'm not sure this is the same as what you're saying so in case it isn't, the story starts at the baptism technically (because that starts the chain of events leading to Anna being bought), not when Anna is bought. When Anna is bought, it is extremely significant to Booker, that's when he 'brings [them] the girl, wipe away the debt' but then immediately regrets this decision as he chases and, this causes him to live in regret. Later on, the Luteces meet Booker again and offer him a chance to save Anna buy dragging him into the red universe (sorry, Fringe colours) and take her back, at which point he forms his new memories (because the two version of Bookers did not share memories and thus they have different memories) based around selling Anna, not around Booker meeting the Letuces.

And the vision fits into mine because that is a memory, Comstock had the vision through a tear prior to buying Anna which means when Booker is pulled through later after meeting the Luteces again he too can remember it (it's not suppressed due to the significance of the memory to Comstock, just like "bring us the girl, wipe away the debt" is significant to Booker and isn't forgotten either).

This is true. I just don't like how going through the game,without knowing it's significance first, I associate death with that office. This is ingrained into my thinking now through teaching with gameplay. You die you end up in the office. And then on further playthroughs I'm supposed to start thinking it doesn't always mean death (when it did before) and it's just Booker unconscious and dreaming.

I feel like the game is more calculated than that and it sullies the significance of that room being associated with death. It's like when you die in combat then you don't actually die, you're just always knocked out and remembering things. It makes death less significant then. I get where you're coming from as I reckon you understand what I mean too

 

[Nicktock]

I don't disagree with anything you just said. Even my own intellectual development was very similar (Gamefan and Timothy Zahn for me). And you have a point in terms of the game trying to be a big budget mainstream game. It certainly reaches for more than most mainstream games attempt. I just think it tries to do too much and is underdeveloped as a result.

I definitely still find it weird, compelling and interesting, which is more than you can say of most game narratives. I just wince a bit when people call it a "great story" or a "great narrative."

I kind of view BioShock: Infinte story-wise akin to Inception. It's a big blockbuster with nerdy "science" stuff, not a huge epic about the human condition, and nor do I think it was trying to do that.

I think the first BioShock held a lot more ethical/thematic significance to me, and developed its themes better. I think it speaks to your first point, the game tried to do so much and should have honed down on less aspects of it.

So while I certainly think to story is good, I'd equate much more to Inception then A Tale of Two Cities

 

[Noray]

I don't think it is terrible. It is certainly more interesting than most videogame stories for sure. I just kind of grimmace when people refer to it as a "great" narrative. I have talked about various points that bother me throughout this thread but I can consolidate:

1) The game is unfocused, tonally and thematically.

It simultaneously seems to want to be a social satire of American fundementalism, a personal relationship of a father-daughter relationship, and a science fiction story about how the concept of parallel universes impacts our concept of moral responsibility. I teach literature for a living and if one of my students came to me and told me they wanted to create a story with all those elements I would probably tell them they need to slow down and pick one because even tonally those elements distract from one another and you it is very unlikely that you will be able to develop all of them sufficiently. Instead they serve to distract from one another.

The social commentary/satire elements of the setting always seemed to me as a backdrop, it never seemed like the focus to me. As such I think that's fine, it doesn't need to be much more developed. It's just color. I think it's meant to be a kind of 'puzzle' story more than anything, can't think of a better word for it, but like Inception, Memento, Shutter Island, The Prestige. The rest is theming.

2) The personal interactions between the main characters are shallow.

Elizabeth's interactions with you mainly consist of her finding something you did disagreeable and then running away. Then you shoot a bunch of things and find her and the conflict goes away without really being discussed. Most of the time Booker might as well be a silent protagonist because his statements to Elizabeth mostly amount to "I'm sorry" followed by prompts to "Press X to console" (the new "Press X to Jason"). The revelation that Booker is her father is a good example of this. The characters react in an almost nonchalant manner when the issue is brought to the forefront.

I'll give you this, it could've been better. There are some very good moments, like when she makes Booker promise to not let Songbird take her again, but they could've developed it a little more. I don't think it's as one-dimensional as you make it out to be though. Also, a part of Booker always knew she was his daughter. And by the time Elizabeth is free from the siphon and she sees all the parallel universes, she's something close to a godlike creature. It seemed to me less shallow than someone who's so powerful, she's just embraced it. She knows what has happened, what's going to happen, etc.

3) The narrative is delivered in a very disorganized fashion.

The opening 20 minutes of the game establish amazing ambiance. The last 20 minutes is a giant info dump. Key information about major characters actions and relationships is delivered through tiny sound bytes that are broken up and spread around the world in the tape recorders. This would be find if it just filled in the details, but important information to even making sense of the plot is delivered in these tapes and are miss able. I had to go to a wikia to find out what exactly the twin's role was in Booker's narrative because the main narrative doesn't explain it despite how important this information is. The "amnesia" device from the tears is not only a convenient way to deliver a "ta da!" plot twist at the end, it also makes much of the narrative needlessly confusing and unreliable. When you are telling a story this complex with multiple timelines and spanning 30 years+ of history in a 13 hour game primarily about shooting dudes, an unreliable narrator and false memories are very stupid things to do. They just obfuscate your story needlessly.

Disagree. I think a lot of information is meant to be white noise to the player. You're given the pieces, but don't know how they fit together yet. It's the nature of these kinds of stories. Also, I think as a videogame it gets away with most of this. If the game straight-up told you everything that's in, say, audiologs or the environment, it wouldn't be a puzzle anymore. Piecing together the story IS the game, for me.

4) The narrative has contradictions that don't make sense when analyzed.

I realize that you are always going to have this problem to some degree when dealing with time travel and multiple universes, but the key moment in the entire game--the baptismal scene at the end, literally makes no sense. Not only is it a bit absurd to imagine that the future daughter travels back in time to drown her father while bystanders look on (let alone an infinite number of Elizabeths all conspire to go back and drown an infinite number of Bookers), it doesn't even make chronological sense. If Comstock never existed (ie. Booker was drowned) then there was no one to give the baby Elizabeth to. As some other posters have recommended, we could view this scene as metaphoric, but metaphoric for what is the question. I literally have no idea what was suppose to be literally happening with that baptismal scene. There are similar problems in other aspects of the narrative.

For one, there were no bystanders. It's a scene of atonement. Booker's ready to pretty much erase his existence to ensure Elizabeth never has to endure what she's endured. Which, as a father, is probably the only good thing he's ever done. It's redemption. He's cleansing himself of his sin, as a baptism is supposed to do. Only he drowns, because in his case it's the only way to redeem himself (and erase Comstock). For that, I'm willing to believe the game/Liz when she says that they went to that pivotal moment in spacetime and killing Booker there results in no more Comstock, regardless of how it 'works'. It's sci-fi. Sci-fi is basically a vehicle for using technology and science as a vehicle to convey themes and ideas.

5) Elizabeth is used to as a crutch explain information to the player that she would have no reason to know.

It's a neat device in a way. Rather than having an on screen prompt, Elizabeth gives teh player directions or explains narrative events but the game never makes much of an effort to explain how she knows all the stuff she knows. She basically just becomes a box that Levine can use to dump whatever he wants the player to know. It's a cheap device akin to the authorial voice over in a film. Sometimes that kind of device can be used successfully to accentuate a narrative, but it often becomes a crutch by a writer to explain in an inelegant way things they want the audience to know rather than integrating that information into the actual narrative.

Does this happen that often? Yeah, she delivers exposition now and then, but I don't recall any instances where it isn't contextualized (albeit somewhat lazily with "I read it in a book.") No problem with this.

Phew. Anyway, I respect your opinion and that you took the time to write it out. But I don't think videogames have to necessarily stick to conventional literary wisdom all the time. Sure, it stumbles here and there, but overall I think it's a terrific achievement and one of the best stories told in the medium.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Oh and I said this way back a few dozen pages but it got buried fast and maybe people didn't see it but the Heads tally is 122 before Booker gets there and the sequence of ringing the bells at the start is also 1-2-2. As I saw it Booker we control first is Booker 122, then when we die after baptism at the start we turn into Booker 123, hence why the coin flip is flip no.123

Anyone think of another instance with 122 in it?

 

[LiK]

anyone finished 1999 mode yet? secret ending or anything?

 

[nbthedude]

Actually, I understand the comparison due to the multi-verse themes, but I think Inception is way more focused. I think it is an excellent example of how you can tell a complex sci-fi story with a sharp focus. There is a bit of ambiguity in the end (I would argue not really but that's another story) but everybody is very clear on what that spinning coin means on the table. It has been our guideline for discerning reality throughout and that movie, despite having multiple layers of sequences that all impact each other, very clearly transitions from one to the other so that you always know where you stand. It isn't all cut up and delivered in tiny bits scattered here and there over a 30 year time period.

 

[jacksepticeye]

anyone finished 1999 mode yet? secret ending or anything?

No, there is very definitely only 1 ending

 

[Sorian]

This is true. I just don't like how going through the game,without knowing it's significance first, I associate death with that office. This is ingrained into my thinking now through teaching with gameplay. You die you end up in the office. And then on further playthroughs I'm supposed to start thinking it doesn't always mean death (when it did before) and it's just Booker unconscious and dreaming.

I feel like the game is more calculated than that and it sullies the significance of that room being associated with death. It's like when you die in combat then you don't actually die, you're just always knocked out and remembering things. It makes death less significant then. I get where you're coming from as I reckon you understand what I mean too

I'm still with you, I associate death with the office as well and I believe that all the way through until you are visiting the office at the end of the game during the Elizabeth Grand Tour. At that point, she is walking you through different realities so you aren't a new Booker when you are visiting the office this time.

 

[ElzarTheBam]

anyone finished 1999 mode yet? secret ending or anything?

No secret ending. Everything is constant.

 

[LiK]

No, there is very definitely only 1 ending

No secret ending. Everything is constant.

shame.

 

[Sorian]

shame.

Not shame at all, the story calls for one and only one ending. This is the only way things could get resolved. Even if they decided to add in an ending where you fight the songbird instead, he would just end up smashing in your skull anyway and a new Booker would come along who hopefully, would not fight the songbird and continue along to this one and only ending.