Follow TV Tropes
PC Master Race, represent.
My biggest problem with the game is that I didn't finish it.
It seems like this is the only one of the three that you didn't already know a lot about. That's kind of funny. And sad, because you missed that intense final battle with an OP!Eleanor on your side. I loved the heck out of that segment.
I recall her motivation being "find this guy for me Booker, wait where did he go?" and changing to, "Wait, there's another Booker? Ah well, off with his head."
I'm fuzzy on that part because I recall Booker and Elizabeth going to an alternate Columbia where they were able to find that person Fitzroy was looking for... except it didn't matter because they ended up in a universe where Fitzroy successfully lead a revolution alongside another Booker who'd died as a martyr, so she saw you and Elizabeth and decided that two Bookers "complicated the narrative." Elizabeth eventually kills Fitzroy but... isn't there still a version of Fitzroy waiting for Booker and Elizabeth to come back.
I have to assume I forgot something in-between, but the retcon of Fitzroy's motivation was supposed to make her more sympathetic. We don't know to what extent the Luteces were influencing her or for how long but, without that scene, Fitzroy just betrays you for the hell of it.
That was a pretty nonsensical portion of the story if you ask me.
Of course, this same female character gets captured, beaten, and tortured by Atlas and crew on a consistent basis, and the ending has her willingly die to save a single Little Sister.
I mean when you put it that way. Admittedly it's the first time you play as a woman. I don't think the story would've worked if Elizabeth were a gung-ho action hero. That was part of the problem with Booker - he's just too good at murdering his way through a flying city with newly-discovered, supernatural powers that he barely receives any introduction to, in addition to using the skyhooks and flying around like a maniac fighting off armies of deranged townspeople. The original Bioshock made you feel cornered (at least until you were clubbing Big Daddies and snatching up children to increase your own power) for the first half of the game. After the initial chase in Infinite prior to finding Elizabeth I never really felt like Booker was in danger.
I mean it's unfortunate and it doesn't really affect what they could have done with Elizabeth and...
I didn't care for this either. In hindsight I'm indifferent towards it, playing it, I was too wrapped up in the story's bittersweet conclusion to care, but somewhere in-between those two periods I was kind of annoyed that the entire point of the story was to A) conclude Elizabeth's story, and B) explain how Fontaine/Atlas got back to Rapture. Which, unless I'd forgotten an audio log in the first game, wasn't something that needed to be explained. By the time Jack arrives we can assume Fontaine went into hiding and Atlas emerged to wage war on Ryan.
My question is still what was Elizabeth doing during Comstock's flashback in Burial at Sea Ep 1. We see her standing on the other side of the portal where Comstock and another Booker are fighting over another Elizabeth, except this one died.
The end of Infinite was supposed to kill every Comstock and every Booker. Except it didn't. So was Elizabeth exploring the remnants and trying to stop Comstock? It seems like she's the reason that version of Anna died because the only other version we saw had her survive.
edited 16th Jul '17 8:11:55 AM by Soble
Probably my two biggest problems with Bioshock 2 are the weapon order (Damn You, Muscle Memory! at its finest. Thankfully one can rebind the weapon keys, or use console commands to add weapons preemptively just before getting the hack tool) and the decisions that decide Sofia Lamb's fate. When it comes to how you treat the Little Sisters, the way you treat the three characters you can decide to kill or spare is absolute. Wouldn't it be better to make it a majority sway? That way I can spare Grace Holloway while having Eleanor kill her bitch of a mother.
As for Fitzroy, in the original story she is so caught up with "killing the seed of Fink" that she's willing to murder his child, and Elizabeth kills her before she can go through with it. In the retcon, the Luteces tell her to threaten the life of the child precisely so that Elizabeth would kill her — thus committing her first direct murder — as a means of forced character development. It completely rewrites the moral lesson of the event from, "It doesn't matter whose side you're on if you go drunk with power," to, "The entire universe focuses around Elizabeth."
As for the ending, my understanding is that you get the best ending if you save all the Little Sisters and spare at least one of the characters. I murdered that double-crossing bastard who betrayed everyone, but spared the first character.
edited 16th Jul '17 8:26:56 AM by Fighteer
The base game did consider trying to use a separate key to gather things in a container to make sure that people knew what they were picking up (instead of looting everything willy-nilly). The problem with that is that there weren't really any items that you didn't want to pick up (excess ammo non withstanding).
For Bioshock 2's ending, here's the formula:
Rescue all Little Sisters = Good Ending. Harvest all Little Sisters = Bad Ending. Mix and match between the two = Neutral/Sad Ending.
Whether or not Sofia Lamb lives or dies depends on how Delta handles the three characters he can murder or spare, alongside how he treated the Little Sisters.
However you treat the three characters is subjective, as their fates only affect if Sofia Lamb lives or dies. Eleanor's attitude remains independent and only depends on the fate of the Little Sisters. Frankly, I find Sofia Lamb dying to be the better ending, but I have to kill Grace Holloway in order to do so (killing Stanley Poole and Alex the Great are easy "kill" choices).
edited 16th Jul '17 8:21:15 AM by RainingMetal
The only things you don't want to pick up from containers (usually) are cigarettes and alcohol, and the latter become kind of awesome when you get the Booze Hound tonic.
Also, yes, I spared Holloway and rescued all the Little Sisters, so I would have gotten the good ending if I'd gotten through that damn final battle.
edited 16th Jul '17 8:22:38 AM by Fighteer
However, in Bioshock Infinite there is no such thing as Booze Hound. Of course, only in the base game are smokes and booze absent from containers, hence why E is still loot everything in Columbia.
Also I never cycle through Plasmids via keys; I scroll through them instead. However, I always try to keep their order consistent (you can easily do so via the Gene Chambers): Electro Bolt, Incinerate, Telekinesis, Hypnotize every time.
Frankly I only consider the Good Ending to be determined by how you treat the Little Sisters. How you treat Holloway, Poole, and Alexander fall squarely into YMMV in my opinion.
edited 16th Jul '17 8:24:22 AM by RainingMetal
As far as I can tell, the DLC messing with the "loot all" hotkeys is a bug — it seems as if the container interface uses the default bindings regardless of whether you rebind the controls. Unless it's always the opposite of the one you bind, which I didn't care enough to check.
If you found the Gene Chambers' interface easy to use, more power to you... /shudder
edited 16th Jul '17 8:26:11 AM by Fighteer
It's actually quite possible that Elizabeth is a Death Seeker, though if that's the case there should have been more exploration of the idea. She also lampshades that personally murdering every spare Comstock wasn't the best plan, but she was enjoying it a little too much. "We DeWitts can never leave well enough alone."
Of course, just because a story mistake is lampshaded doesn't mean it's magically fixed. There were better ways to handle the "filling in the gaps" and having Elizabeth as a PC, not to mention the sexism inherent in killing off a female deity for the sake of some random guy. Basically any Deus ex Machina at the end to let her survive would have been justified. Like maybe she crawls her way to a Tear as she's dying and regains her god powers. I dunno.
The order of the Plasmids gets messed up when you upgrade them, but you can easily re-sort them at the Gene Chamber by selecting each Plasmid and putting them back in again.
So, a thought occurs.
How did Comstock know about Booker's false memories? He refers to the "debt" and calls Booker out on this. He's aware that Booker is here for Elizabeth.
But when we revisit the moment Comstock took Anna we see him as a younger man. We know that at least a decade has passed since Comstock last saw Booker since Elizabeth is grown. Comstock "banished" the Luteces sometime after stealing Elizabeth.
So did Comstock just happen to remember Booker and put the pieces together that this younger version of himself was the same Booker he took Anna from? I could understand that, but Comstock seems to be aware of Booker's manufactured memories.
Booker didn't know who Elizabeth was and believed he was there on the job. The only ones who knew the true story were the Luteces.
Ergo, the only way Comstock could have known about Booker's "debt" is through the Luteces. But since Booker didn't conjure the "debt" until after the Luteces were betrayed
by Comstock and after they brought him to Columbia, I don't understand when Comstock would've found out about the "debt."
Hmm, good questions. It makes me think a bit.
Actually, now that I recall, most of the events of the game, up to and including the showdown in the airship, are depicted in the display in the airship's antechamber. So the Luteces must have shown Comstock all of it, up to and including the moment of his own death. Remember: at no point does he seem surprised to see what's going on, almost as if he's playing out some kind of preordained story.
Edited by Fighteer on Jul 31st 2018 at 8:46:14 AM
EDIT: Hold on a sec.
Prior to their deaths I can't imagine the Luteces would have been able to predict that.
Well that moment was kind of weird, but, I can't remember the Luteces having that sort of clairvoyance prior to their transformation.
Edited by Soble on Jul 31st 2018 at 6:07:31 AM
What do you mean, clairvoyance? The Luteces can open tears to alternate universes, forwards and backwards in time, what have you. This is how Comstock acquired all of his prophetic knowledge.
Correct, but the entire plot of the game is put in motion by the Luteces. If they could forsee their own betrayal of Comstock... isn't that kind of a problem?
It's never fully explained how much the Luteces know about what is going to happen, both before and after their "deaths". They seem to be into this For Science! to an almost frightening extreme, and only give serious consideration to the morality of what they've been doing much, much later.
If I had to venture a pure guess, though, I'd say that observing themselves through their tear device would introduce too much strain or potential for paradox, so they avoid it. They know that Booker comes to Columbia to rescue Elizabeth, but not how until they do it it themselves.
Edited by Fighteer on Aug 1st 2018 at 6:30:43 AM
Also, Comstock spent a lot of time looking through tears. Enough that he was rendered unable to sire a child and his appearance was changed. The Luteces, by comparison, still looked normal at least despite their seeming more direct use of the portals.
Presumably, they basically used the tears on a utilitarian basis, "In, out, get knowledge/item/whatever." They used them for a purpose, for a goal. So happening to see Comstock's betrayal is unlikely. Their thought process was "we want to understand these tears and their potential."
Comstock, on the other hand, used them absolutely willy-nilly. He wanted to see everything and used them to an extent that it affected his body. His thought process was "I AM GOING TO SPEND EVERY SECOND I CAN LOOKING AT TEARS. FUCK YES."
Edited by Larkmarn on Aug 2nd 2018 at 11:56:32 AM
BURIAL AT SEA feels like an enormous fuck you to fans, ironically.
Which is weird given the amount of fanservice.
I think it's because I actually came to care about Elizabeth and Booker.
Really? I felt the opposite. It was a perfectly tragic send off to a pair of tragic figures.
I'm conflicted over Burial at Sea.
Edited by Soble on Aug 2nd 2018 at 6:20:28 AM
For me, Burial at Sea's ending had some power in the moment, but from the moment they started talking about Jack, if implicitly — I didn't really like it as a bridge. From the perspective of BioShock, it adds a needless complication that integrates oddly into the story. Conversely, from an Infinite perspective, it sacrifices Elizabeth to make Infinite feel like some sort of build-up to the first game. I don't need a happy ending, or a sad ending, but I didn't find it a fulfilling ending. I think I get what they were going for with Atlas being obviously going to betray you and yet you still not having much choice other than to work with him, though it was so blatant and without any twists on Elizabeth's part that she kind of comes off as gullible.
While I'm criticising, I didn't like some of the other rewrites concerning Fitzroy, either; while people faulted the Fitzroy turn, the rewrite is so on the nose and in the face of events in Infinite that it feels cheap. I'm also not a big fan of the idea that killing someone is going to help turn someone from a 'girl' to a 'woman' — the idea that this is some sort of big, necessary sacrifice on Fitzroy's part I find grating. I know the Luteces are already kind of morally ambiguous, but it really puts a sour light on things with them, too.
Still, I did have fun stealthing around Rapture (I went with 1998 Mode on my first playthrough since it seemed interesting), and admittedly while the stealth mechanics weren't deep and once you can straight-up turn invisible the tranqs are probably going to be enough to cover your occasional screw-up, I did still enjoy the ambience of the place. I don't really have a problem with revisiting Rapture, but the ending trying to tie the games so together undermined it all for me.
Edited by Lavaeolus on Aug 2nd 2018 at 2:11:13 PM
I agree with all of that, especially my problem with the retcon of Fitzroy's motives and Elizabeth turning from a literal god to a weak stealth-FPS character who regularly gets the pulp beaten out of her by all the male characters. I'll give you that it's thematic, but damn if it doesn't peel back the empowerment message of the main game a tad.
Yeeep. I can understand why they wanted that gameplay, but I feel like there could have been a better way of doing it. Like, god!Elizabeth is still out there doing stuff, but she created a small mortal instance to handle Rapture. And the way they retconned both games in order to connect them was similarly not good. I would have preferred if this was a different Rapture than the one we saw in Bioshock 1 and do something else with it. Maybe have Elizabeth beat Fontaine before he gets Jack, but show the city is still headed for ruin because Ryan's Objectivist utopia was doomed from the start.
Something I keep coming back to is how the deal with Fitzroy worked which I just now realize I asked some months ago at the top of this page, so nevermind.
Edited by Soble on Dec 2nd 2018 at 7:54:45 AM
I would also argue that it continues the problem the original game had that Columbia relies too HEAVILY on Rapture's world building and characters with those problems being handwaved as "They're all In-Universe!Expies of each other!"... Which doesn't make the writing any better. You're just admitting that not only did you copy your old homework, but that you couldn't be bothered to put that world building into the game in the first place and relying on players to have played Bioshock in the first place to understand how this world works.
I also fully believe they set out with Elizabeth as a player character at the pitch... and then ran into the writing problem of how to challenge (and play as) a physical god and could only solve it by Bringing Her Down to Normal and damn the character consequences of it.
It might also be that the 'Elizabeth gets the crap kicked out of her constantly' problem might be an extension of that; They had an untouchable character that they had to bring down to normal and they had her get beaten a lot to make sure that they weren't keeping her too powerful, even if it undermined previous tones and themes of the character. They overcompensated.
BTW, apparently there's a sequel in development under the code name 'Parkside'. I don't remember if this was shared here before.
Part of the problem is how they handled Liz in the main game, too. Elizabeth was originally not going to know how to control her powers, and moreover-be actively harmed by misuing them. In fact, IIRC there were even going to have some sort of Karma meter around how much you pushed her into misusing it.
So I think if they had kept that mechanic, it would have made her better in the DLC as well-she can still have her powers but not be omnipotent. Though I think another issue is that they wanted to bring back hacking (and other stealth mechanics), a mechanic that was replaced in the main game with tears. One of my bigger complaints with Infinite is that the game got rid of hacking and the like.
This actually, I think, is the root of Infinite's problems: Columbia is meant to be something of a spiritual successor to Rapture (which itself is a spiritual successor to the settings of the System Shock Games), but in practice it's actually more like a Spiritual Antithesis.
Rapture is a dead, claustrophobic place filled with insane monsters. You are late to whatever tragedy happened there and have to play detective. Columbia is a living, breathing city which is wide-open and populated by sane (if evil) humans.
Columbia is still what I call a "Shocklike Setting", though it is a bit of an unusual one. "Shocklike Setting" is the term I use to refer to a (usually abandoned) Crapsaccharine World, usually a Punk Punk dictatorship of some sort, with a major element being ironic juxtaposition of optimistic propaganda and a dead wasteland. Examples include Rapture, Aperture Science, Fallout's entire setting, and Wellington Welles.
Community Showcase More