Bioshock Infinite Critique | After the Hype 

Are you going to do the mass effect series the first two bioshock games uncharted series borderlands series and resistance series? Even dead space maybe.

😢😢

​@@conservativecarnage3783 I hope he does Resistance and Dead Space, some of my most favourite video games of all time.

Probably because this game had a rough development and changed constantly throughout development, leading to them to have to cut and paste a bunch of stuff together before their release date. I believe one of the developers said with all the cut content they had, they could have made more than three games on it alone.

I think Elizabeth did the bloody baptism and did it until Elizabeth was unable to do it. What Jack goes through is the undoing of all Elizabeth 's work because by unable to do the baptism in the first place it took her ability. All of what she did was ultimately didn't matter as an oroboros can't exist. Elizabeth ultimately failed and the timeline just kept going without her. The reason why i say this is because we see the version we see in the final DLC, where is the left most Elizabeth. The only explantion is that ultimately the drowning just didn't work.

Why indeed. like if she just visited and left, maybe. But why that.

Those "geniuses" archieved the Little sisters and the horrors in Bioshock 😊

​@@temkin9298 Booker De Witt really had existed in the named way He had been a Veteran who had done all those things of his biography. But the true Booker had been accused of murdering a Social Worker in Chicago. " BOOKER YOU ARE A MURDER AND LIER - Elisabeth comment had been also to the fact.

narcs on their first bust are less obvious than those idiots. but then again they probably never did anything like that in columbia before

The guy playing the violin even stops playing once you enter the room. Most players know shit is about to go down and my favorite lets play bioshock infinite played into it and selected the option to demand for the tickets and get their hand stabbed. Dialog with Elizabeth is different but about the same and she even wraps your hand up.

I was about to make the same point,

Love the dude ordering sauerkraut

The one woman even stops Elizabeth pretending to recognize her, which was obviously just to confirm its her/and Booker

Absolutely perfect reference no notes.

i dont get it

@@Soapy-chan Futurama reference

@@Satherian ah thanks.

Only thing i remember about this was that Elizabeth was resistant to being groomed so they held off while they worked on the conditioning method.

Oh man that would be hilarious, listening to Elizabeth spouting all kinds of racist creeds! XD I wish life were that big of a shitpost.

Not much different every big Dictator has done.

The interesting point of Booker DeWitt He is based on an authentic former soldier who was really involved in those events like siege of Peking and Wounded Knee But he had become infamous when, hired by the Pinkerton Agency for ending the strike of the meet packer workers in Chicago, he had raped and murdered a Social Worker That event made worldwide headlines. Berthold Brecht used it as base material for his play SAINT JOAN OF THE STOCKYARDS That must had been the affair Commstock had accused of Booker one or two times.

i feel like its because the real comstock is always dead and the leader of columbia is always a booker who took his place so he never brainwashed elizabeth because he really saw her as his daughter or else cause he was scared of causing paradox.

Another main change between Fitzroy 1 and Fitzroy 3 is that 1 used The First Lady as mostly a Medivac for her people, including what was likely her second in command that you only learn from a billboard in the police station with the rest of the Vox command structure at large. When you get into Dimension 3, they're all dead and the First Lady is a flag ship leading the charge. I really think they should had added a few more Vox's to differentiate them. Like one for Fitzroy 1 talking about doing this mostly for her friend, people, and maybe some little reminiscing about her mother to give her some more idealist revolutionary. Then we should find some for Fitzroy 3 going on about how her lieutenants dying showing that it showed the only one she can rely on is herself, becoming more radicalized, and learning some of the wrong lessons in her upbringing. The big thing that I think would separate things would be that Fitzroy 1 was willing to honor her word to Booker, but Fitzroy 3 all but had Booker 3 killed to keep him from dividing her own power base in a better example of the Revolution eating it's more moderate members.

@@AliexsterThat would have been interesting, It really is a shame how bland this game is.

it actually doesn't matter at all. they were screwed the moment they decided to hop dimentions in general.

@@detectivefoxley9912 so bland lol. They may not of done the thousands of things they promised but bland isn't a good discription.

honestly i feel that they tried to make this game so over complicated that they ended up failing at so many things. the biggest one i feel is the really half hearted attempt at racism in this game. the reviewer doesnt seem to mind this and even references hearing others (mathewmatosis probably whose opinions about this game pretty much mirrors my own) say that it matters but it honestly does to me. its so immersion breaking to me that they didnt portray racism very well.

No, it's the timelines being consolidated and in the main one, he kept his daughter.

I will say that that's the same as saying that The Last of Us loses stakes after they leave Boston. The goal of the game isn't to resolve the conflict of the civil war or kill Comstock or Fitzroy. The goal is to escape Columbia, but each Columbia they go to is just as dangerous and out to kill them as the original. Changing realities is the same as changing locations, so the stakes still stand.

@@GameCat16 no it isnt. those are two distinct things.

@@jonahereaux4551 When you are following the same person, yet the setting around them is changing, whether the settings are places or timelines is a matter of semantics.

​@@GameCat16but the world sets the stakes. When booker and Elizabeth jump dimensions, they still act like they're bound to the consequences of their old world but they're not. It's a different world where different things happened. Joel and Ellie just left the city but the ultimate goal is to reach the fireflies. You can't equate those without looking stupid

@@bipstymcbipste5641 Booker and Liz's ultimate goal is to escape the city, and they're working under the assumption that most things are the same, as most things are (they're still wanted, after all, and Comstock's still in control, and the Vox are still backed into a corner, etc). At best, I'll say that the arc has some sloppy exposition to it, as it's revealed, in a hasty way, that they were in the same reality all along, and that Liz was just creating a new reality around them (much to her horror), so they're still dealing with the same Comstock. Again, it was hasty, but the stakes are still there.

Yes

The battles in bioshock2 are mich better. This needs the weapon wheel for one.

Never saw all the previews or if I did, never got obsessed with it. Bought it the day it came out, and loved it.

While i agree that the previews fucked everything up, the combat is both better than the others as well as more refined. To top it off, it's something that resides at the bottom of the barrel because of the WS segments. The world itself puts latest games in a shitter. Look at Forspoken and tell me it doesn't put it to unspeakable shame, in all departments, and doesn't even scoff at Shitfield (out of pity). It even beats The Outer Worlds for aesthetic choice!

My fav walking part is when he goes to after he died after leading a revolution and it’s just all dark and red banners all over some some lady is singing a song and vox are standing around

And I really appreciate Monty calling out how the overt racism of some characters fits in the narrative while just letting Elizabeth randomly throw slurs around is just...wrong on so many levels.

@@jackwilliamson1807It's called depth, like when you real huckleberry you're supposed to appreciate the work as a whole and understand humans are flawed. You expect a story or a politically correct campaign? It's not offensive to expect the viewer to understand that even good people can say flawed things. It's really strange how people seem to expect perfection from the good side and total incompetence and vitriol from the bad side. It's very sloppy writing to paint your characters in black and white and to have every "good character" essentially embody the perfect Mary Sue aspect. You need to portray realism and distinct points of view in a coherent manner not have a bunch of goody two shoes taking on a bunch of Disney villains. It boggles my mind how the mentality is almost reverting to childhood with this criticism. A trait of a good villain for example is managing to be relatable, to make people think they could've ended up alike the villain or somewhat seeing the logic in a villains actions. The worst type is the disney and generic variety, when people are incapable of writing properly they think a good villain is made up of everything they hate in a person. The same rule also applies to protagonists, a perfect goody two shoes with no personal flaws to overcome is boring and forgettable and people really seem to love these generic and stereotypical heroes and villains but it does a disservice to story telling and insults the intellect of a smart viewer. Life isn't black and white but for some reason adults really want their stories to be black and white so they can justify their dislike and not be wrong or have to engage in critical thinking. That should be fine for a fun action movie but not for complex stories or stories attempting to be more than a quick action cash grab.

@@paularbelaez4742 cope

@@fawn2911 , I'll translate your comment, for others: I don't understand what's being said, and I certainly don't have any ability to counter it; so, I wrote a single word that I see as negative and hope someone else can use it in a rebuttal.

​@@Jay_SullivanDouble Cope 🎉

Sorry other information that the game doesn't provide (and is just. sloppy writing) BUT the reason the big daddy attacks you in part 1 but then apparently the gatherer protector bond isn't a thing in part 2 is because there's a sign in suchong's lab that says the detachable drill modifications on big daddies makes... angry... gas... that makes them aggro on sight.... which is why the big daddy in part 2 aggros on you (but not splicers i guess i dunno) so they discontinued the modification which is why big daddies don't have those drills in the other game. you can tell they didn't have a plan in part 1 and just had to make things up as they go.

AND ANOTHER THING--but the room Atlas give's a lobotomy to Elizabeth his canologically his "special room" where he doesn't have to put up his Nice Atlas Act (like he even was using his act anywhere in the DLC) and be mean to people. And that' everyone who goes in that room knows he is Fontaine. So all the people who roll Sally in?? They know Atlas is Fontaine. which is ????? like you said Atlas KILLED to keep his identity hidden what do you MEAN he's been telling other people who he is.

ultimately you could say Im too white also to really comment. really my problem with the depiction of the vox isn't that they used violence to achieve their goals (they had to. we've seen Columbia, they couldn't just protest their way out of that. there is something to say on how depictions of characters are always framed as angry and violent characters) but its the fact they're condemned for using violence for their cause. All they do before you get the "only difference is how you spell the name" line is kill the police and topple over a vending machine. But isn't that what we've been doing the entire game as Booker and Elizabeth? All we've been doing is killing the police and looting the stores, with little care for Columbia, why is it so distasteful now that its the oppressed fighting back, instead of the main characters? and it's not like Booker and Elizabeth try to mend their own actions after the Vox, the continue onwards killing everyone in their path in unremorsefully. Compounded by the fact the game frames their extremism as bad, but then goes to have Elizabeth and Booker go to the extreme of deleting Comstock from all reality. It just feels unbalanced for the game to go "Daisy is irredeemably evil for trying to kill a child" and then provide the actual child murder, Booker, all the tools he needs to make things up to Elizabeth by sacrificing himself, and in BaS allowing Elizabeth to redeem herself after her abuse of Sally. (Also why does no one talk about the plane Elizabeth had to crash to save sally. that's like 90 some people who were entirely innocent of Rapture she was willing to kill to save one child she screw over)

you don't merge for the same reason the twin's don't you are considered different people.

I do not think Levine and his development team considered Bioshock 2 canon. So perhaps that is why Elizabeth being responsible for so much might be a valid (but still disappointing) possibility.

I really enjoyed it too. I even enjoyed the ending. It'd be fun to see a Bioshock with more gun, trap and environment focus, rather than plasmid-heavy.

Part 2 encouraged stealth gameplay which I appreciated plus it switched up the arsenal which was neat. Lots of effort.

I enjoyed the implementation of invisibility as an actual plasmid/vigor quite a bit, I’ve got to admit.

Metoo and I wish we gpt s bioshock infinte 2 where we play as Elizabeth

​@@ronniewhitedx yes but part 1 was entiwrly unecessary

elizabeth is literally ignored by enemies - she's the worst kind of follower npc, the one that doesn't take part in the game. give booker ability to open tears and you just got rid of escort mission. but after development hell bioshock was in and what they wanted to do with the franchise i'd say it's better to have absolute failure of a game and lore so destroyed that nobody else can use it than another franchise that releases less than mediocre entries every year for quick cashgrab from brainless fanboys.

After playing all 3 games remastered, infinite was fun for like 2 h after that I just gave up any hope for that game it was nothing but a mid range fps it was mind numbing arena shooter. Bioshock 1 seems like only good game out of that trilogy.

@@ryszakowy tfw Ashley Graham still the best escort mission character. Capcom will fuck it up with the remake though i have 0 faith in them anymore

@@jinmark9453 inb4 best part of 1 was the big daddy part

@@ryszakowy "but after development hell bioshock was in and what they wanted to do with the franchise i'd say it's better to have absolute failure of a game and lore so destroyed that nobody else can use it than another franchise that releases less than mediocre entries every year for quick cashgrab from brainless fanboys." Pretty ironic given a new bioshock game is in development.

It's also a bit wild that the game is willing to *tell* you all of those things about Booker, but only bothers to *imply* that he's mixed-race and several of his worst past actions were partly motivated by trying to prove his Whiteness in the face of discrimination over that.

@@UrLeingod ngl i didn't even pick up Booker was mixed the entire time I played Bioshock Infinite.

Kinda like UrLeingod said, some of the guts of the story are contained in audio logs that you can pick up throughout the game. There was apparently just enough native american in Booker to catch the attention of one of his military superiors and he got some racial shade thrown his way, hence his participation at the wounded knee massacre, the baptism afterwards, and the creation of Columbia. It's a clever trick the writer's pulled; generally when a native american mixes with a white person it can sometimes be difficult to tell that they are only half white and it can become nearly impossible to tell after several generations. If he had been mixed with anything else the writers would have shown their hand.

@@keithrichmond4390 Wow, I didn’t even know that. What the fuck why doesn’t the game delve into that idea further? Flesh out Booker’s character and the analysis of the institutions of American racism by examining his urge to assert his “whiteness” through violence. Infinite is a game with such wasted potential; it introduces so many compelling and socially relevant themes and ideas and then proceeds to do absolutely nothing with them.

@@runawayfromtoads674 In game Comstock talks about how Booker is of Native American ancestry

Even as someone with good hearing I use subtitles in games because sometime the audio is so chaotic or the mix is so bad that it's necessary, and sometimes it also helps to focus on what's being said. Like playing the older Call of Duty zombies maps after playing Black Ops 4 is weird and you miss out on so much of the story if you're not playing with all 4 players nearby so you can hear each character talking. I have also started to watch tv shows and movies with subtitles where available because again sometimes the mix is awful and sometimes it helps me to focus on the content and the story especially when there's a lul and nothing engaging is happening

yeah they never mention other elizabeth

Uhh, not to be an asshole or anything, but may I ask why you're spelling Populi with a Y?

@@grahamcarpenter5135 Dutch autocorrect. Also I can't change it now that my comment got hearted

People miss something VERY important. Elizabeth just can't make tears between different realities, she can MERGE different realities together choosing what is on top. Look at what happens when Elizabeth opens the tears in the Good Time Club and Bull House. Does it look like the other tears? No. These two tears expand outwards and things change behind it. And why does Chen Lin remember being dead? That's because he is a merged version of a Chen Lin that's alive and one that's dead and he remembers both at the same time. You see other people having the same problem all through the last part of the game. The reason that no one talks about an Elizabeth in Comstock House is because there isn't one. The Voxophone were the dead Booker talks about it is a "left over" from the reality that existed before Elizabeth merged it with another one. Note Elizabeth really doesn't know she's doing it or have control due to the Syphon. Though she suspects it as she states she didn't know if she and Booker traveled to the Vox Revolt reality, or she MADE it. Spoiler: She made it. sm

@@mattwoodard2535 To be fair though, if we assume she merges realities, wouldn't that mean that Booker and Comstock, being the same person, would be merged? Does she choose what to merge? Is our Booker distinct enough from any Comstock that he simply couldn't be merged? It gets muddled really quickly, but I can see it working.

There are more novels like that back in the Sixties and Seventies it had been a rave.

I feel you, It’s just so crazy to imagine how different infinite could’ve been, maybe in another universe infinite would’ve been the game we all wanted and maybe even more.

@@joseibarra7735 how? more live-events?

Read the book Rapture instead for a proper Bioshock prequel to the first game. Other than one plot hole, it's very good and you can tell the writer researched games 1 and 2 well

I've never understood your point. How can you say that knowing that the Bioshock universe is made up of an infinite number of realities? What's to say that the changes aren't simply due to the fact that it might not be the same reality (although that sounds like an excuse)?

Ka-ching!

Yeah, I always assumed that they got back to dimension 1 when in the airship

I did the exact same thing the first time a played through it. I remember being in such awe by what I had just experienced that I had to play it again. It is still a game that I will go back and play through once a year. I can see the valid critiques of burial at sea but I personally loved that DLC. Even with the ending being a sad one I still walked away feeling content and deeply moved. Both the main game and the DLC is something I always highly recommend to anyone that hasn't played it

I feel that, loved both bios as a kid then when I finally completed infinite I was in awe around the final minutes, going back to rapture, the ending all of it is just so good

and overwhelming stupidity of the writing like booker not trying to cover his hand tattoo after seeing false prophet ad or PICKING A GODDAMN BALL after being mysteriously warned to not do that. they could've at least pretend to try defying the fate or something.

@@ryszakowy Of course Booker is going to do stupid shit, he just got rocketed into the atmosphere into a floating city that he definitely didn't know about before hand. To say that he's out of his element is a colossal understatement. I agree that Booker acts kinda stupid, and it is a little frustrating, but it really isn't that bad to me. Sure, they should have changed it to remove moments like that, but it isn't that big of deal.

@@ryszakowy 1. He didn't understand what that meant, why would he think you cover it up? And 2. He was told not to pick a certain number ball, he didn't know that he would pick that one up specifically You just seem to have a huge hate boner for it

Would you consider the first bioshock‘s intro to be one of the best as well?

😊nn😊😊😊😊n😊n😊k😊😊k😊n😊😊😊😊😊😊😊m😊😊😊😊😊😊😊n😊k😊nn😊😊😊nnn😊😊k😊😊😊😊😊n😊😊😊😊😊😊

Good point. It's less dimension hopping, and more just deus-ex-machinaing yourself into a universe where the problem is solved. And it strips away all the stakes. All those people you were fighting for the past 3 hours, they're in a completely different dimension and they don't matter any more. This basically what that famous Rick and Morty episode described, but Bioshock falls into the trap.

@@HotDogTimeMachine385 It doesn't help that the game doesn't really commit to it. There are narrative questions about this that could be explored, and some plot holes like 'where's this universe's Elizabeth?', but the game just brushes over them.

yup, jumping dimentions ruins the narrative and story makes no sense whatsoever. - we need to find the gun maker - gunmaker is dead *jump - gunmaker is alive but his tools are missing - why in the hell are we on about that, the deal with communist fitzroy might not even exist, just storm the ship and fuck off. - tools are too heavy we have to jump *jump - congratulations booker you got manipulated by communist propaganda and died for nothing *TIME PARADOX - there was no deal between them - elizabeth technically is still in the angel statue *TIME PARADOX - going after elizabeth booker gets transported to another timeline where elizabeth is old and bitter and bombards new york WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON AT THIS POINT - old elizabeth sends booker to a timeline where she's bing held in the tower - this isn't even the original elizabeth WHAT THE HELL screw revolution, screw communists, screw peceful columbia where fotzroy got executed and vox populi were hunted down like parasites that they are. - now we're going basically nowhere - just take first flying ship and fuck off to paris BUT NO - comstock has to die - zeppelins and songbird WHY THE FUCK IS HE A SUPPORT THEY TESED FIGHTING HIM SO MANY TIMES - you know fuck all that, lighthouses and keyes from nowhere or you know what? even better... at this point nothing matters, columbia, communist vox populi, 1912, comstock, booker, nothing. - oh right comstock has to die even tho he has no meaning at this point stupidass ending that solves nothing.

@@pastramiandrye considering that in first two dimension jumps elizabeth is still locked in monument island... and walking around at the same time... so when elizabeth says to songbird "take me home" and he flies god knows how many miles in the air without elizabeth being protected in any way or being able to breathe... he arrives at monument island and sees another elizabeth... but we don't talk about that because it makes no sense whatsoever

I always thought you went back to universe one after traveling to universe two. I didn't think there was a universe three.

usually revolution is even worse than "opressors" american bullshit aside - revolution did no good to russia or france, it only made it worse.

@@ryszakowy If that was the intended reading, then it was unwise to lean so heavily on Colombia's racisim. You can't just put Ameican bullshit aside when talking about this game. Again, this is a result of Infinite being about too many things at once. Metaphors and messages get confused in all the noise.

I think there lie a dissonance between Bioshock 1 and Infinite. Objectivism is at the core of 1, as it drive the plot, created the setting, and is the core philosophy of the two mains antagonists. Infinite’s critique of America’s Hypocrisy end up being windows dressing while we supposed to really care about the MULTIVERSE. Funnily enough, it doesn’t work either 9 years later for the MCU.

So in short infinite stretched itself too thin by trying to cover too many ideas ?

And that's the issue! No matter intent or interpretation, the game puts you in the role of a white man mowing down waves of black people with heavy weaponry. Black people who are fighting back against slavery. No matter what, not even pausing to really examine these actions is the game's biggest flaw. (that said, I am white, so I can't imagine what it would be like to play this game as a person of color)

One thing that personally bothers me about Burial at Sea that I don't see many talk about is that Booker has Anna's initials tattooed on his hand. That's something only the Bookers who sold off their daughters did, and since the one we were playing with was actually Comstock, he'd have no reason to do this. Not to mention the fact that he specifically went to Rapture to forget about what he did, yet he has the initials, to remind himself of what he did?

@@AeridisArt Brilliant! Excellent point. That is something I have never even thought about. I love when people dig into these kinds of things and make good points about them.

@@AeridisArt I've heard someone say he did that because he killed her and it was his way to remind himself what he did

Magnetic coupling

@@harrybudgeiv349 Hello, it has been almost 2 years, and I think I've got a reasonable explanation. So imagine an electric drill, the drill bit and the motor are 2 separate things. The only way this could work in Bioshock is if the drill had its' motor built into the drill itself, in the center. So the long cord could be supplying the electricity (as well as acting as the drill bit retrieval cord), the motor would be housed in the interior of the drill bit, and the drill bit would be on the outside. The only problem with this theory I can see is this means the drill bit itself isn't solid all the way through, it would have to be hollow to house the motor. And that means the drill bit wouldn't be durable. Smashing into that wall would probably shatter it into a thousand pieces from the impact force. Hmm. On second thought, I'm no closer to an answer than I was back then! I need more time to contemplate, I will come back in another year and a half and share my findings. We have got to crack this case.

Indeed, despite all the criticisms, there aren't exactly many games like this that release anymore.

i especially just also still LOVE the entire intro/beginning sequence up until when elizabeth figures out booker is betraying her-i think that’s when stuff unfortunately starts getting progressively more and more stupid. and not because elizabeth finally gets some agency; that’s really great, but because of what starts happening to booker, how the game handles elizabeth’s autonomy (poorly, because they can’t commit to it at all) and the whole debacle later with the vox pouli … even on my first playthrough, i felt like the cracks were beginning to appear there, and i really wanted to go back to what the game was at the beginning. but the whole first section of this game is so masterfully crafted and engaging that i still know of very few other games that have such a well-executed beginning. despite its linearity, irrational is at their peak there with their environmental storytelling and art direction, which have always been their strongest qualities as a studio. i honestly wish they would have just started releasing walking simulators at some point. capital g _GAME MECHANICS_ and traditional narrative storytelling always seemed to be holding them back more than giving them extra tools to work with. but they’re gone now, so … thanks for that, 2K. :(

The only thing beautiful associated with this game ware Elizabeths lewds. Sadly i did not see any new ones in some time. Pity.

@@xxXXRAPXXxx go horny jail

Nah

Fact.

It's just a... nasty unpleasant hopeless way to end Elizabeth's story and it slots into the first game's story badly because that story was complete and didn't HAVE anywhere for it to slot into. It's answering questions that weren't asked in the first place and explaining things that didn't need further explanation. And it's a nasty, pointless ending for Elizabeth.

You beat me to the punch with this, and I agree with everything in it. I'd like to add on a few additional complaints about some of the things in Infinite that were brought up in the video. Per the racial tensions, I feel like they lack a certain bite to them. In fact, I generally feel like the entire game doesn't go far enough in what it presents. There are plenty of scenes in the first two games that really encapsulate how messed up Rapture became due to its extremist ideals, especially in Bioshock 1 where basically every area has one horrifying aspect to it. What really stands out to me is Ryan burning down his forest. It's such a callous act presented as something he believes to be totally acceptable that it shocks me. In comparison, while the racial issues are shown in Infinite, they feel a little... toned down? The only scene with any sort of weight to it is the lottery but even that feels like a bit of a cop out. No slurs are used, no one is actually lynched... you see the aspects of racism that everyone knows about but not the parts that make you vaguely uncomfortable and in particular, that reflect back on society in a way that makes you think. Hearing that Ryan burned down his forest raises a question about how far property rights should extend that can have nuance to it, but showing a comical version of the most socially unacceptable version of racism doesn't actually raise any questions. I can even double down on this by asking why it matters to the game. The fact that Columbia is racially segregated is a point that's almost entirely dropped after the introduction, and the racial tensions end up being replaced with economic tensions by the midpoint without any connection to why the nationalistic ideas of Columbia lead to racism. This is in contrast tot he first two games which go to great pains to show how the ideals they are critiquing lead to the horrifying consequences of their settings. To add on to Elizabeth, I couldn't even view her as a character. She's poorly written like you said, but I also found her to be far too game-y. I was acutely aware that she would just vanish during combat and appear again when it was exploration time, and her "assistance" was an unwelcome distraction in the middle of a firefight. Games are all about immersion through interactivity, and Elizabeth presents no interactivity at all. You can use her to open tears from time to time, but that's really just a glorified vigor - and I have issues with vigors as well. In worrying that Elizabeth would annoy the player, Irrational heavily overcorrected and made her a non-factor. It's a game entirely about escorting another character in which no gameplay revolves around escorting that character. Sure, Booker makes a bond with Elizabeth, but unless the player is captivated by seeing a girl act overly cute during cutscenes you won't actually get attached to her, or even think or care about her. The Last Guardian and Ico come to mind as games that do the "escort an ally" in a way that actually makes you depend on and grow attached to your companion. These games can be a little divisive because when your ally doesn't behave it's frustrating, but completely cutting out the only other character in the game, the one that's supposed to have magic powers and be the subject of a game spanning escort quest, from gameplay just doesn't sit right with me. And then there are vigors. I hate vigors because they are the reason this game had to be named Bioshock. I don't dislike the gameplay implications of vigors, I dislike the fact that vigors exist just because plasmids existed. There's a rule in writing that if something is in your story and it doesn't serve the plot, you should consider cutting it. The lore explanation for why vigors exist is incredibly half assed - Jeremiah Fink used one of their magical portals and *just happened* open one to Rapture in the right place at the right time to witness plasmids being invented, at which point he stole the idea to sell himself. The plot of Infinite so so full of holes that it's basically a ring, but this one stands out to me as being incredibly stupid while also being incredibly unnecessary. It wasn't enough for the game to have a system of magic powers just like those from the prior games - they literally *are* the powers from the prior games. Plasmids are magical and I can accept that, so why couldn't Irrational come up with a new magical reasons for vigors, if they really wanted them? But even more annoying to me is that vigors cheapen the idea of plasmids. Plasmids are at the heart of everything that happens in Bioshock 1/2 but they are also a physical representation of the ideas of the city. Plasmids are science and commerce running unchecked. They were created by unethical but technically legal experimentation on the poor and impoverished underclass. They represented a way to become the ubermensch of Ryan's dreams - someone better not just in intelligence than the parasites, but better in ability too. Unquestionably superior, the perfect human. They were so attractive that they warped society and led directly to the civil war that tore the city apart. You can't just treat plasmids as a magic system because they are also emblematic of the themes of the games. In contrast, vigors just... exist. Seriously, go read the Bioshock wiki page for plasmids, then read it for vigors. Vigors are an afterthought, something included because Irrational was too worried that a Bioshock game wouldn't work without magical powers you can mutate yourself with. They don't relate to the story or themes of the game, they're not a part of the background of Columbia. Probably the worst part about this is that the game has a magic system that works with the themes. Tears can create portals to different times. Bioshock Infinite presents a society so obsessed over the past that it literally deifies the founding fathers. Booker's (and thus Comstock's) most formative experiences are in the past, and the game takes a ton of time to hammer home this past. Why aren't tears used in some way to tie into these ideas? If tears can be used to literally travel through time, why didn't Irrational write in a way for Comstock to, say, get a copy of the original Constitution? I don't know exactly how this idea could be used, but I do know that vigors just cheapen both games.

You missed some things as many others have done. Elizabeth states that when she was young (before the Syphon was turned on) she could make tears and go anywhere she wanted. In other worlds Elizabeth HAD been out of the Tower and had experience with the world. This is discussed just after getting back to Soldier's Field after leaving the Hall of Hero's. sm

Yeah i only liked elizabeth in burial at sea. In infinite she was so inconsistently characterized, it was jarring.

In the DLC for the game, it is revealed that the Luteces actually told her to do so. They told her that it was the only way for her rebellion to win. She was told exactly what she had to do and the price that she would pay for it, but did it anyway. In reality, she was just helping to ensure that Elizabeth became a killer.

@@twigtwig3110 I know I am kind of late, but the fact that vigors are not only copies but a "superior" version of plasmids, further shows how much of an afterthought Vigors were. Not only are they drinkable, which is far better than having to get an injection, but the side-effects are pretty much non-existent or much easier to avoid, you know the side-effects that were one of the main focus on the first two games. What is more is that Colombia somehow has enough Adam to produce thousands of Vigors and Salts bottles, enough that they can pretty much be found everywhere in the city, despite the fact that Colombia being in the sky would not have much space to raise Sea Slugs. Yet somehow they have enough Adam to the point that they do not even need to use the little sisters or anything similar. They could have given Vigors a religious theme. Comstock could have been the one who "invented" the vigors, which would further reinforce his position as a holy figure. And then he would only give a select few the power of the Vigors, turning them into "saints". Giving Vigors to a select few would explain the non-existence Adam shorted, since very few people use Vigors on the first place and would also give more meaning to Booker's "false prophet" title since he is the only "non-saint" with the power of "miracles".

My issue with the baptism is similar but goes further. There is definitely an issue in the logic of drowning a booker who had already refused the baptism, and was therefore not on the path to becoming comstock. It literally accomplishes nothing other than "telling the story" But If you look at the whole strategy of using the baptism to get rid of Comstock in the timelines, it doesn't make sense. If there is a million, million lighthouses, and there is an alternate universe for all the different possible outcomes (multiverse/quantum universes) then even if you drowned booker before he became comstock, there would always be a universe where that DIDN'T happen. The only thing this accomplished was killing the one version of Booker that we know was "good", albeit Elizabeth had already more or less triggered a psychotic break in him so I doubt he would have been any good beyond all that. Elizabeth even acknowledges the absurdity of travelling through the multiverse killing comstocks because the idea of doing that in an infinite multiverse is patently impossible. Drowning Booker at the baptism has the exact same probability of success (zero). Ironically, for all Elizabeth's talk of the pointlessness of travelling from parallel universe to parallel universe killing Comstocks, that's exactly what the plot of Burial at Sea part 1 is about.

You could argue the ending has Elizabeth put all of Booker's memories into his younger self: the "origin" version that hadn't made the choice to accept the Baptism or not. So the Booker that drowned, was still the "baby smothered in his crib."

@@whiterex66 That's the issue with multiverses in general. Every single decision by every single person creates a new universe. Infinite possibilities don't make for good stories. There are zero stakes when you can travel between those universes. If you made a rule that only big decisions matter (like the lifechanging baptism), then you could maybe craft a story but even that leaves tons of plot holes. Basically just don't use multiverses and you'll be fine (and avoid time travel too while you're at it).

Elizabeth collapsed all the Bookers that ever went to to river into one when they went back to the baptism. When she drowns him, she drowns all of them. This is shown to be the case when all the other Elizabeths appear alongside her. It shows that he is merged with all the other Bookers too.

No you don't understand, the game says that if she kills this Booker then it kills all Bookers! Just turn off your brain, stop thinking! The game has spoken, constants and variables, it works because Lizzie says so! /s

??? If what happens has been foretold, you can built a society (and a city) around that. You are poor because that's how it is, you are rich because that's how it is. You have more, or less, rights because that's how it is. You are smart or dumb, because that's how it is. You can go and combine that with exceptionalism, because you are exceptional because that's how it is. I'm not saying that Columbia it's a good example, I'm just saying that it was possible and it is possible to make something like rapture using determinism as a motif.

What you’re saying going keeps going way over my head but I like how you worded it nonetheless

? The first game wasnt about ideology either. It was about the jewish struggle against the guy white man who supposedly kept suppressing them and taking their stuff. It's about Jewish identity.

I would argue that the society in Infinite was built around "what happens has already been foretold" if you take that to be a reference to the concept of manifest destiny

Are you high?

Heavily heavily disagree. the ending is shit and does not work at all. The beginning is fantastic but the further the game went the worse it becomes.

@@TrixyTrixter I disagree. It was mind blowing the first time I played it. despite the cut content I really enjoyed the pacing of the story. There was nothing stupid about it imo. This, Disco Elysium, TLOU, and soma are some of my favorite narratives in gaming.

@@maxwellsamuel3255 I do not think I need to try and explain anything. The entire story makes absolutely no sense going by the game worlds own logic.

@@TrixyTrixter "game is sht, just trust me bro"

I feel like they missed an opportunity for the hall of hero’s section. Imagine this, you’re walking through the section, seeing the patriots glorified for their heroic actions against the horrific savages and tyrants, fighting for truth, justice, and the Columbian way. But then, in the corner of your eye, you see a tear in the veil, just barely getting a glimpse on what’s in the other side as you hear it whisper softly in your ear, further igniting your curiosity and imagination. You walk towards it in eager anticipation, you turn your head to Elizabeth, herself eyeing the tear from a distance, except instead of wonder, she looks afraid, disgusted by its presence. Still however, you gesture towards it in eagerness, demanding her to open it. Elizabeth, closing her eyes, lifts her hands towards it, and pulls the tear apart by its seams, as she exhales all the breath within her, folding onto her knees as she tears open the veil. And on the other side of it, what was once hidden from your sight now presents its self, what was once in the dark comes to light. You see the army man gun down the natives who are fleeing, desperately trying to escape the storm of bullets that fly over their heads like the eagles above. In the distance you can hear the thunderous crack of whips, the sound echoing in your ear, as you turn to see slaves bend onto their knees in worship to their masters. You see people being hung from stakes, being cooked alive because of the false witnesses who testified against them. You see the truth. You look back at Elizabeth, who still stands on the other side of the rift, scared to cross over. You are presented with a choice, do you accept this reality, do you accept the truth, or do you back to the bliss of ignorance? I feel like the idea of time travel and alternate timelines could have mesh well if this games themes of exceptionalism, but the way it was implemented just didn’t mesh well with the overall game.

Yeah, it's a really messed up aspect of american culture that we revere the violent revolution with the British over taxes, but we consistently pose violent resistance to slavery as too far/extremist and bound to lead to endless bloodshed 😅

The only counter-argument I'd have is that Elizabeth isn't just some innocent white girl in this narrative - she's supposed to be Comstock's Lamb, literally the potential new face of the horrific regime Daisy is waging war against. Killing Daisy is what Booker and Comstock would have done were he in that room with her, and they wouldn't have batted an eye. But Elizabeth does it instead, and we as the player get to see where Booker's influence has taken her: to a place where she can ignore her instincts and empathy, give in to fear and keep the horrors of Columbia alive. This is Elizabeth as the Lamb, who Comstock wants her to be. I don't think the writers intended for Daisy's murder to be a sacrifice for Elizabeth's character development. It would be just one death of thousands at her hands if she followed Comstock's plan for her. Instead, the writers show that Daisy's perspective was ultimately correct by having Elizabeth "pull the weed out by the roots", killing Booker before he can cause all these horrors.

@@adultcool2395 I say that because they deliberately have her make comments that boil down to "why segregation just seems silly!" like she's so innocent she'd only have the purest thoughts. But the thing is: this is the only normal she knows. Why would she come to that conclusion? As far as she knows this is what the entire world is like. I know she reads books and all but I doubt she'd be allowed anything that would possibly put her at odds with Comstock's views. In fact you'd think she'd be indoctrinated with them. But they couldn't have their sweet Disney princess be racist, and they chickened out on any hard-hitting depictions of racism. So all we're left with is Daisy is just crazy and needs to be put down. The writers basically DOUBLED DOWN on Daisy's death being for Elizabeth's sake in Alone at Sea. It was only unfortunate implications before, and then they tried to fix it with "No, no the Luteces told Daisy to deliberately set up a scenario where Elizabeth would have to kill her and Daisy accepted this" which just make it infinitely worse.

@@SaiScribbles Damn, yeah you're totally right. I forgot about the writing Choices in Alone at Sea. "Racism bad" is so easy and diminutive to write from a white perspective, and Daisy definitely had more potential than what she ended up with. I wish they'd at least had the courage to show ANY level of programming in Elizabeth for her to break, so that burden wasn't placed on a Black character's life. As you said, it really doesn't make sense for her to be this innocent while ALSO being intelligent and well-read, and ALSO nearly escaping cult programming.

@@adultcool2395 Not to mention Rosalind Lutece is most responsible for Columbia's existence. Why the hell would Daisy take her advice? Especially when she's being advised to die by two affluent white people, one of which built the city that enslaved her. It's such bad writing lol. Imagine if Elizabeth just parroted Comstock's racist rhetoric from a completely naive and ignorant place, and she came to learn why it was wrong. Because that's actually realistic and how kids are indoctrinated with racist ideas. Racism can be passive as well as active. Which again is my biggest problem with the game. If you're going to tackle the topic of racism take it seriously. Don't just make it window dressing that barely resembles the history of the real systemic oppression of black people in America, just to make your game seem "deep".

and then what? songbird takes enough damage and simply flies away? or songbird destroys the platform you are in changing main story each time you screw up?

@@ryszakowy exactly what I was thinking

@@ryszakowy They could have kept him as a reoccurring boss fight I can imagine a chase-fight on the Skylines, for instance. That would have been cool

I thought Suchong always dies at the same time? He gets frustrated at the latest bonding attempt having seemed to fail, then smacks the little sister when she keeps trying to talk to him while he's dictating notes, then the big daddy-who actually WAS successfully bonded to the sister-drills him to death. I thought the inconsistency was in whether the big daddy was Delta (and the little sister was, therefore, Eleanor) or not? Suchong definitely died from the first working protector bond, right? In fact his death was the proof it had worked? I remember one of the plot points in B2 was that Delta and Eleanor were the first protector-gatherer pair to be successfully bonded. But I think in B1 you can actually find the big daddy that killed him and it's definitely not Delta?

Dude. The game mentions how Booker is a villain every chance it gets. It continually emphasizes how he is a born killer and doesnt shirk away from murdering people and doing evil. That is the foundation for him being erased from all timelines.

@@reilysmith5187 because white man bad, obviously

This is really well thought out. Bioshock Infinite amazingly succeeds at creating a fun combat arena and interesting combat mechanics that hold up to replay value. The powers are great fun and the shooty shooty bang bang is great. The skylines are great and I wish more games had that idea. It utterly, resolutely fails at any kind of social commentary. It's so one note and obvious and even its morals are problematic when it's trying to make them progressive. It also takes a weird centrist viewpoint that totally misrepresents what centrism generally espouses. It's just a nothing game when it comes to messaging. Good thing that the kaboom ratatatatatata wheee zap pow is fun.

@@reilysmith5187 And then that same guy basically says "what the fuck" when Elizabeth kills Fitzroy. If Booker is morally taken aback by something you just did, it might not be the most justifiable course of action. At this point in the story, Elizabeth's worldview, and literally the entire world that she's been captive to, is crashing and burning all around her. Tensions are exceptionally high, and one personal setback after another has likely driven desperation to panic. Like Fitzroy's own actions, no matter how regrettable the outcome, the result shouldn't be to dehumanize and "kill" the character, either literally in Fitzroy's case, or metaphysically in our interpretation of Elizabeth's identity, nor what is decidedly her story. Edit: Also, in partial response to the original comment, while I do wish more had been done to explicitly communicate that Booker's words were wrong, I think that the aforementioned stress is a decent - if purely interpretive - reasoning for why Elizabeth might not have felt up to arguing the point. As she is actively analyzing her own sense of morality, it could feel difficult and unfair, not to mention downright exhausting and fruitless, to try and dispute Booker at the current time. Also, screw BAS:2.

You said it perfectly

True. Little Sisters are considered near immortal with the amount of healing the slug provides for them. There's an audio log somewhere that describes how a little sister broke her leg and it had to be rebroken to actually put it in place because it healed so quickly.

Makes the family dinner scene in Fort Frolic that much more horrifying. The adult frozen statues bleed when you hit them, but the little girl does not. That’s a little sister frozen in there, and she’s trapped alive encased in plaster.

Well now I feel less bad about sacrificing 2 of them on that stupid escort mission in the first game-

Really really good points - thank you!

Very rarely do you see a comment this well laid out, and easily digestible yet intelligent on RU-vid. Awesome points man.

The french revolution was just as violent and terrible as any other, there is a reason the time right after is called "the age of terror" , revolutionarys know the danger of people forming groups and usually try to cement control by removing any disagreements.

I think theres nothing wrong with the baseline of both sides being evil in the end. Its weakness comes from the amount of time exploring the way this conflict was portrayed, not the way the conflict was portrayed.

@@CAMSLAYER13 My apologies for not returning your comment sooner. The character of the French Revolution is an extensive topic that fills countless books and hours of footage, so I feel it is a little beyond the scope of this comment section to give it the full detail it deserves. The quick version is that revolutions are neither automatically vile or virtuous, they are not intrinsically violent or peaceful, and my comments here are to highlight how the game looks to Le Miserables and the French Revolution as a touchstone, overlooking the more relevant Haitian revolution and the whole discourse of slave revolts. The game's commentary on the subject is too short and incomplete to avoid unfortunate implications.

Came here to say the same

I think it easily become revisionist though. There are people that would, upon the mention of Churchills (for example), would shout about his sins and would have none of the good he did. You could easily end up with a revised outlook on the man

Tldr

@@tvdvd8661 Can't read a couple of sentences? Come on...

@@jpHasABadHandle plz hop off the high horse at least, thats like a few paragraphs

Um, the only Bookers that were drown were the ones that accepted the baptism to become Comstock. If you listen you can hear the preacher as Booker what his new name will be (Comstock) right before Elizabeth pushes Booker under. Our Booker is there because they need a Constant (to kill Comstock) to keep the Comstocks from having any chance to survive. sm

@@mattwoodard2535 That's the neat part: Elizabeth drowned ALL the Bookers before the baptism She even says it: "before the choice is made, before you are reborn" Booker making his choice (staying Booker or becoming Comstock) was the constant that she wanted to eliminate As another review said, the act of drowning Booker before he makes the choice, in order to eliminate the constant altogether (and the risk of becoming Comstock) isn't cutting the rotten branches: it's cutting the whole stem away! This plot just doesn't work, dammit! 🤦🏻

That's the beauty of amendments they can be amended. If the majority of the country are really set on stiffer gun regulations they should vote accordingly.

I was wondering why he didn't mention this point. That is one of the strengths of the constitution and the way it was setup. It can and sometimes should be amended.

I treid to tell this to people for years but most of the fanatical fans loving the game answered me with Hate Male

Same. I love video essays and got recommended Bioshock 1 vid. Been binge watching this dude - he's so good

Thank you!

People do need to not take a reviewers word and just repeat its great. They should play it and come to their own conclusion. The game is good but defying it doesn't let you appreciate what it is doing right and where it fails. Neither does just hating on it for not being what you wanted.

Reminds me of when Angry Joe acted like Skyrim was the second coming of Christ. My bias and nostalgia tell me Skyrim is a masterpiece but the older I get the more I realise that it really isn't at all. Although I'll defend Oblivion to the ends of the earth that game will always be a 10 for me.

@@-Nihilus- Skyrim came out in 2011. Of course it may seem dated or flawed, but for the time it was revolutionary and great. It was the metaphorical second coming of Christ within open world RPGs and completely changed the genre and landscape of western RPGs forever. And Angry Joe wasn’t the only one who thought this. Also Skyrim is infinitely better than Oblivion.

@@BruceWayne-fj9bm Skyrim isn't an RPG

He's a hack fraud and a shill.

I wish I could say it was on purpose to get algorithm boosting comments but… nope. Just brain fog!

Then you havent watched American Krogans review which is even longer and more in depth.

@@reilysmith5187A Neo Nazi’s perspective on a game satirizing racism, American nationalism, Christianity, white supremacy means zilch.

You're think too much into the religion thing. Booker is a bad person. Regardless if he is Christian or not Christian. Saying otherwise is insecurity from either an Atheist or Christian if they are defending either Bookers.

@@asscheeks3212 True, the issue isnt religion itself, its itr being used to control people or use it to excuse their own terrible actions. And booker undoubtly did that. Its very strange with elisabeth?! why, she wasnt a terrible person.

@@marocat4749 she is a bad person though? Bas episode 2 is just a game dunking on her killing some poor Comstock that was redeeming himself, her punishment was dying alone in rapture where she rots forgotten. Both Booker and Elizabeth are terrible people who deserve their fates, but that's what makes them interesting

I'd say that actually Comstock's path of villainy wasn't directly about accepting the baptism, it was in what he took from it. The division between Booker and Comstock wasn't about god, god was just a mechanism, it was about forgiving themselves and/or letting themselves move on from what they'd done. If Comstock had just taken a meaning of forgiveness from having been baptised, in the sense of "I have done these awful things but through my sincere regret/repentance for them and through god's love I am unburdened by them and will use the experience to be a better person going forward", then he wouldn't have wound up the villain that he did. Comstock, from what we see ingame, instead took VINDICATION from the baptism, the belief that his actions were retroactively good and right, cut to years later and he's bragging about the massacres he participated in through musical extravaganza exhibits in the hall of heroes. It's an easier path, thinking that actually you never did anything wrong to begin with, but's one that lead him to become a monster. Comstock mistook forgiveness for vindication, that was the catalyst for who he became.

It really shows how important the medium is. If either were a book by a popular author, the story alone would probably make it a poor book. As a blockbuster film? Maybe acceptable if they really nail the visuals, but still suffering for its story. A triple-A game, on the other hand, doesn't rely as much on story or visuals alone - the combination of an alright story, reasonably enjoyable gameplay and striking visuals makes for a solid mainstream game. 6/10.

Ellie cannot be hurt or killed in the last of us combat. I don’t know what game you played but it wasn’t tlou.

@@madcircle0461 there are moments where she will get grappled by a clicker or something and it will game over if you don’t react fast enough. It’s a little red plus with a circle around it that slowly drains.

I think DJ Peach Cobbler said it better than I ever could - “Andrew Ryan might not have been a philosophy you agreed with. But you at least saw his point of view. When he asks “Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?” The obvious answer is Yes! But when Comstock asks “should we enslave black people and worship everything the founding fathers said?” Most players answer will be “what the fuck are you talking about!?”

@@MontyZander after having pondered on it, I would say that the first game is about the wanton desire to make decisions free of consequence, the second game is about dampening consequences by destroying choice. They had a chance to make a clandestine point about how the two are inseparable in the third. I remember finishing Infinite the first time and thinking what a vapid point it was making. They threw the baby out with the bath water by saying that choice and consequence are irrelevant. Infinite's point voids any meaning by simply telling the player that choices are irrelevant and it's foolish to fight an outcome that is perceived as inevitable. What's the point in trying? Why play their game at all if there is no real point to any choice the player makes. Granted, the first two games didn't really give the player many choices that drastically altered the games plot but the overall points to the exercise were there.

@@MontyZander if anything I think Infinite is kind of a jab at Mormonism moreso that anything. After reading a fair amount of the book of Mormon, I got those kind.of vibes from Columbia. I don't know if the parallels were intentional or not.

Especially if it is asked on the spot and a whole team worked on the product

Agreed

Really really good point!

Oh thank god im not the only one

Thank goodness it's not just me!

>POc Ok liberal

It would be better if Elizabeth killed her to defend herself. Not to save a pure soul of a little kid. It would be more interesting as a parallel with bucker. The way it is Is just cliche. "You went to far" and all that jazz.

Same here, I only ever use those descriptors (race, gender, etc) when I'm showing someone who doesn't know. Otherwise, I see the characters as characters, worlds unto themselves.