Bioshock Infinite - Plot Discussion
It is called - I decided to "run" through the infinite, byrenka, to the shock end - to understand what kind of animal this is, which is now fashionable to discuss so fiercely.
As a result, no matter how hard I tried, I deleted 10 hours from my life for the sake of bioshock (pride, her mother, did not allow to put the gameplay on easy). Do I regret the time spent - a separate question, the topic is not about that, I can say one thing for sure - for me personally it is now very clear: fanboy (or journalistic - one hell of a thing) about the gameplay (dull, monotonous, protracted, bright, dynamic, wretched- shooter - whatever) - this is such crap, in comparison with what the Author wanted to share through his infinite - and, of course, we are not talking about the amazing Columbia (Colombia), not about Elizabeth and not about the ability of irrational games to design worlds inside the monitor ... And what, exactly? - tell me. After all, it is sincerely (!) Interesting.
In the meantime, a brief chronology of events through my eyes (through the eyes of a wild man, who does not really perceive foreign languages ​​by ear, since the subtitles helped out in moments). Therefore, I could not fully digest all that Anglo-gurgling mess of audio diaries - there was no accompanying subtitles at all. So, in hot pursuit:
The main character Booker (Devitt) had a child whom, roughly speaking, he screwed up the cards. And, apparently, in a state of severe hangover, he dutifully entrusted it to his creditors. The main one is a difficult man and, judging by the final scenes, this is DeWitt himself - only a little older. We all, together with Levin, know very well (now) that space-time is organized much more crookedly-obliquely than we think, and an innumerable set of alternatives corresponds to the reality familiar to man.
Booker's child - a girl who was not offended by nature, not deprived of talents, out of malice put all this Levin's alternative in the position she needed and reshaped reality in her own way. Apparently, this was what interested the guest from the alternative future, Booker "Elder" aka Comstock, who was deprived of his children, but obsessed with the idea of ​​a fix to transfer the reins of government to his own utopian state to the same religiously moved schizophrenic, like himself - flesh of flesh, as they say.
Meanwhile, Booker DeWitt, who had committed the most heinous act in his life, still got bored with the squirrel, began to hear voices, forget one thing and glue together fragments of other memories in a strange way - as a result, with the assistance of a couple of space-time stalkers, he goes to the heavenly city of Columbia (Colombia) - to rescue, allegedly in payment of that very debt, the maiden Elizabeth, who was captured in the tower by Comstock itself. Catch up on who this Elizabeth is, why she does not have a finger and why he actually went to Columbia, he cannot, or rather, refuses, almost until the very end credits.
Chronology can be called with a certain degree of conventionality, because - which is repeatedly and unequivocally hinted at by a couple of stalkers-humorists constantly flashing in the frame - there is no future, past and present, what will be - it already was and it is. Therefore, it is not possible to know for certain where the beginning is here and - even - what and how actually happened. And, remarkably, it doesn't matter at all. According to my first - fresh - sensation, Levin's multidimensional message is broadly as follows: each person, at various levels (be it metaphysical, cosmogonic, or everyday-applied), constructs his own realities, and ultimately only what he sees happens ( or feels). Created in a well-known image and likeness, a man got his hands on a full set of development tools. Does not matter,
It doesn't matter if DeWitt's journey to Columbia itself or (oh Lord, forgive the wildest script cliché) was just in his head. The important thing is that he gave up the child for debts, and then sought redemption for a sin, which (atonement) - according to the internal Booker redeemer Comstock - in principle cannot exist. And DeWitt is doomed to stalk the darkest corners of his own consciousness, to construct more and more new realities in search of deliverance. In this context, Comstock really suits the role of a shepherd, or rather, a kind of voice of conscience.
The thing is that Levin's work is so multidimensional - that many interpretations and points of view risk merging into white noise, in which everyone who can perceive the brightest author's presentation will find and convincingly justify their own cockroaches. By the way, this is also great, to build a huge mirror of the correct curvature is a very difficult and interesting task.
Therefore, I repeat, it is curious to read other people's impressions - after all, the infinite has something to talk about))
Modified April 6, 2013 by DiI just do not quite understand, that is, they cut off all those other endless options of universes where the booker could not become a comstock in any way? how can this be where the probability is zero? that is, the very idea of ​​the structure of universes implies or does not imply a change in the course of development of history? or since the past does not exist, then it is impossible to influence the present and the future?
I have a plot and how it unfolds evoked associations with Nolan's film "The Prestige". There was a twin brother, and Booker and Comstock were one person. Completely pointless, but dishearteningly unexpected. That is, the whole point is in this discouraging surprise.
Although the way you are here discussing this nonsense in all seriousness is much more discouraging.
Modified April 9, 2013 by traytI began to assume that they are one and the same person at the moment when all three of them were in a room on his ship, and where he was drowned
But the only thing that made me doubt it was how I could be in two places
I'm a little confused about the Slate story. Here's what I understood, correct what is wrong: Booker has known Slate since the days when Columbia was not yet launched and participated in the battles with him, which are reflected in the exhibitions on Columbia. Slate himself sided with the conspirators led by Fitzroy after Comstock became objectionable and he cut him out of history. So? And why, since Booker, in fact, also stands up against Comstock, does Slate still want to cut him out? As I understand it - banal "the roof went off"?
[member = 'trayt'], if you have problems with English, please write. delirium only your post.
[member = 'Blaze'], as far as I remember, he had long wanted to die in battle as a real warrior, which actually happened. So I tested Booker, telling me how bad Comstock is.
By the way, does it say somewhere who is Nightingale?
Only in Fink's voxophone. Like, I saw a miracle in the gap (a mixture of a machine and a person), and perhaps Comstock will need such a thing to guard the tower.
As I understand it, the ending is after the credits. is it a happy end? That is, they cut off all the possibilities of creating Comstock and Elizabeth.
and everything remained as it was. - Booker and Anna.
The main character, who is left with a daughter, is an irresponsible alcoholic with an addiction to gambling. Post-traumatic stress disorder, or personality trait, whatever.
He lost his daughter, accumulated a bursting feeling of guilt and in one of the attacks of delirium tremens he had a dream about a flying city, the purification of his soul and the salvation of his extraordinary grown daughter.
Well, or an option similar to the Mysterious Island.
In any case, it makes me reject that every mystery is explained by "quantum physics, scourges"
Plotline 1 - Booker DeWitt kidnaps Daughter (Elizabeth) from Kamstock to save her, because Dad mocks her and sets up experiments, Lutessa helps to do it
Plotline 2 - Kamstok kidnaps Daughter (Anna) from Bukra DeWitt in order to save him, because Dad is an alcoholic and does not follow his daughter, and Kamstock needs an heiress, the Lutessas help to pull it off
What did old Elizabeth convey in the note? Kill Booker-Kamstock?
[member = 'Xopek'], melodies to help manage the songbird. Because it was because of him that the booker in all the universes could not save Elizabeth. Modified April 14, 2013 by burger_shot
[quote name = 'Everyone's beloved and respected' timestamp = '1365545882' post = '3213609'] By the way, where does it say who is Nightingale? [/ quote]
I saw recently, on the Internet, the theory that it is a hummingbird enlarged to a huge size and subjected to multiple mutations 
[b] [member = 'Device Of Fire'] [/ b], all Elisabeth disappeared, only Anna (sort of like) from the Booker-Devwit universe remained.
[member = 'Device Of Fire'], all Elizabeths disappeared, only Anna (sort of) from the Booker-Devwitt universe remained.
So it turns out that Elizabeth was in the imagination of ... Booker? O.o Well, okay.
Ken Levine deliberately did not add the ending of the game, so that all sorts of sites wrote about his game and so that the players would figure it out themselves.
[b] [member = 'Device Of Fire'] [/ b], what? Booker "cut off" the branch of universes with Booker-Comstock, which means Comstock never existed, which means he did not steal Anna and turn her into Elizabeth. All the universes remained with little Anna, whom no one stole.
[member = 'burger_shot'], in fact, Elizabeth supposedly cut off both branches ... DeWitt did not "accept baptism and did not become Comstock" and did not "refuse baptism and did not become a Booker-drunk" ... in fact, DeWitt did not drowned in a pond and Anna / Elizabeth was never born.
The moment after the credits does not fit into the concept and was made, obviously, for a happy end.
[quote name = 'Xopek' timestamp = '1365962295' post = '3222662'] Actually Elizabeth cut off both branches ... DeWitt did not "got baptized and did not become Comstock" and did not "refuse baptism and did not become Booker "... in fact, DeWitt was drowned in a pond long ago and Anna / Elizabeth was never born. The moment after the credits does not fit into the concept and was made, obviously, for a happy end. [/ quote]
Levin just really loves Nolan
[member = 'Xopek'], and where does it say that the birth of your daughter was after that moment?
the final scene is a type of intrigue: is there a girl. Has it worked out, or it's time for Booker to get another dose of antidepressant.
[member = 'Xopek'], well, yes, in principle it is also possible. But it seems to me that Elizabeth is unlikely to have gone to the murder of Booker and, in fact, "suicide" (total, in all universes) for the sake of Comstock's death. Well, or at least mentioned it. And the scene after the credits fits well with what I wrote above.
[member = 'Di'], after, somewhere it was exactly said. If before, then Comstock would already have a daughter, why another one? Modified April 14, 2013 by burger_shot
[quote name = 'burger_shot' timestamp = '1365962737' post = '3222675'] If before, then Comstock would already have a daughter, why another one? [/ quote]
Well, Booker-Comstock in his universe may well have not had a daughter for a reason that has nothing to do with baptism - even before that.
In general, I have no doubt, and Levin has enough exaggeration and discrepancies. To me, I repeat, the following is what seems to be the most interesting
[quote name = 'Di' timestamp = '1365244319' post = '3207279'] The chronology can be called with a certain degree of convention, because - which is repeatedly and unequivocally hinted at by a couple of humorist stalkers constantly flashing in the frame - there is no future, past or present , what will be - it has already been and it is. Therefore, it is not possible to know for certain where the beginning is here and - even - what and how actually happened. And, remarkably, it doesn't matter at all. According to my first - fresh - sensation, Levin's multidimensional message is broadly as follows: each person, at various levels (be it metaphysical, cosmogonic, or everyday-applied), constructs his own realities, and ultimately only what he sees happens ( or feels).
It does not matter whether DeWitt was Comstock or not - the game more than once and vividly demonstrates: it will not be difficult for any person to become Comstock - it is enough to specifically move on a radical idea, and then - even a white man, even a Negro, even a religious fanatic, a fascist, a communist - anyone, the result is about the same. It doesn't matter if DeWitt's journey to Columbia itself or (oh Lord, forgive the wildest script cliché) was just in his head. The important thing is that he gave up the child for debts, and then sought redemption for a sin, which (atonement) - according to the internal Booker redeemer Comstock - in principle cannot exist. And DeWitt is doomed to stalk the darkest corners of his own consciousness, to construct more and more new realities in search of deliverance. In this context, Comstock really suits the role of a shepherd,
The thing is that Levin's work is so multidimensional - that many interpretations and points of view risk merging into white noise, in which everyone who can perceive the brightest author's presentation will find and convincingly justify their own cockroaches. By the way, this is also great, to build a huge mirror of the correct curvature is a very difficult and interesting task. [/ quote]