Bioshock Infinite, The ?Real Meaning? Behind The Name & A Rant On Themes

[DrunkenMonkey]

Well the infinite universes, infinite games, all connected is a rather bold idea, but I find it a bit lazy. If irrational keeps pumping "shock" games, Ken Levine is a great writer don't get me wrong, but creating fresh and new settings is finite process. For one the gameplay refinements with each spiritual successor are being watered down into more and more shooting. Also I fear that Levine is playing into M. Shyamalan's corner, where he overuses twists as the main hook of his stories. He's had a lucky break so far with System Shock, Bioshock, and infinite, but once again it's a case of where he relies too much on existing prototypes, rather than coming up with fresh idea. This is all opinion, but I honestly think either Irrational should stop making shock games period so they can, or come out with something new. I highly doubt 2k will just allow the Bioshock franchise to just sleep for a decade or so.

Have you ever studied narrative methods? Maybe this is a gross oversimplification, but basically if you can recognize the patterns in narrative structure and themes, just about everything is a permutation of several different methods of storytelling. I don't know if I really want to go so far as to say that BS:I is a meta commentary on narrative innovation in that there's a base structure that you can add endless different details making an infinite number of different experiences from a set of definite methods. I can see someone who is willing to read maybe a bit much into stuff making that argument... Not me though, I wouldn't do that, no way.
Anyway I might be stretching it, but that's what so interesting to me about this game, it's very open to interpretation.

I'm not talking about the general narrative types, I'm talking about what the specific narrative type that levine might fall into. Like every bioshock game becoming " a man, a lighthouse, a city". It's going to become like rehashes.

Everything is pretty much a rehash of something else in some way or another...

There are no truly unique stories anymore, some variant will have been done, it's practically guaranteed.

Everything is a rehash of everything, yes that's right, but the idea of constantly creating games based around a a man, a lighthouse, and a city, ended by a plot twist will get old. Like I mentioned earlier Levine is good, but I don't think he's good for retelling the same story ten times with interesting perspectives each time. Look at bioshock and system shock 2, he essentially reused the same story, just changing the characters around. I love the shock games, what I don't want is future rehashes that degrade with quality every time a new installment comes out. Like assassins creed for instance. Basically what I'm saying is how I hope the shock games don't get milked period, that is all. I'm not expecting Irrational to create something like a new narrative type in 2016-2020, but I sure as hell don't want them to fall back on the shock brand as their only creative pool. If that's too much to ask for then fine, you can consider all my posts just the ramblings of some guy on the escapist.

 

[Sight Unseen]

Well the infinite universes, infinite games, all connected is a rather bold idea, but I find it a bit lazy. If irrational keeps pumping "shock" games, Ken Levine is a great writer don't get me wrong, but creating fresh and new settings is finite process. For one the gameplay refinements with each spiritual successor are being watered down into more and more shooting. Also I fear that Levine is playing into M. Shyamalan's corner, where he overuses twists as the main hook of his stories. He's had a lucky break so far with System Shock, Bioshock, and infinite, but once again it's a case of where he relies too much on existing prototypes, rather than coming up with fresh idea. This is all opinion, but I honestly think either Irrational should stop making shock games period so they can, or come out with something new. I highly doubt 2k will just allow the Bioshock franchise to just sleep for a decade or so.

Have you ever studied narrative methods? Maybe this is a gross oversimplification, but basically if you can recognize the patterns in narrative structure and themes, just about everything is a permutation of several different methods of storytelling. I don't know if I really want to go so far as to say that BS:I is a meta commentary on narrative innovation in that there's a base structure that you can add endless different details making an infinite number of different experiences from a set of definite methods. I can see someone who is willing to read maybe a bit much into stuff making that argument... Not me though, I wouldn't do that, no way.
Anyway I might be stretching it, but that's what so interesting to me about this game, it's very open to interpretation.

I'm not talking about the general narrative types, I'm talking about what the specific narrative type that levine might fall into. Like every bioshock game becoming " a man, a lighthouse, a city". It's going to become like rehashes.

Everything is pretty much a rehash of something else in some way or another...

There are no truly unique stories anymore, some variant will have been done, it's practically guaranteed.

Everything is a rehash of everything, yes that's right, but the idea of constantly creating games based around a a man, a lighthouse, and a city, ended by a plot twist will get old. Like I mentioned earlier Levine is good, but I don't think he's good for retelling the same story ten times with interesting perspectives each time. Look at bioshock and system shock 2, he essentially reused the same story, just changing the characters around. I love the shock games, what I don't want is future rehashes that degrade with quality every time a new installment comes out. Like assassins creed for instance. Basically what I'm saying is how I hope the shock games don't get milked period, that is all. I'm not expecting Irrational to create something like a new narrative type in 2016-2020, but I sure as hell don't want them to fall back on the shock brand as their only creative pool. If that's too much to ask for then fine, you can consider all my posts just the ramblings of some guy on the escapist.

No, I actually agree with you on that point. When I saw the big reveal in Infinite, in contradiction with the OP I though "okay, so what will they do next?" Instead of opening up to limitless possibilities like the OP suggests, it actually feels like they've limited themselves in a major way, because now if they make another Bioshock game, unless they find a way to mix it up in an unexpected way, everything will feel too formulaic. The kind of reveal they did in Infinite is amazing the first time, but it cuts off a lot of their future potential to surprise us by basically saying "there is always a lighthouse, a man, and a city" and everyone will always be looking for the character that is Jack/Booker and the one that is Elizabeth/ Little Sister and the major enemy will be something Big Daddy/Songbird like.

I'm not expecting them to re-invent the wheel in terms of story, but I don't want them to fall into the complacency trap that they so nicely set up for themselves.

 

[Sight Unseen]

Also, anyone else like easter egg songs?

fortunate son threw me of a loop when I found it.

They weren't really Easter Egg songs, they were important to the plot of the story in a few ways.

 

[FourCartridge]

A time wizard did it.

... I got nothing, to me it was really never explained, or maybe because I am bad at paying attention, maybe I skipped the part where it was explained.

When Booker sold Anna to Lutece, he had a last minute change of heart and struggled to get her back from the tear Anna was being carried into. Her pinky was in the Tear when it closed and got cut off. This made Anna technically in two universes at once, so she got quantum powers... somehow.

Closest to an explanation I've gotten.

Also, anyone else like easter egg songs?

fortunate son threw me of a loop when I found it.

I missed almost all of them, sadly. =(

 

[Kael Arawn]

The reason I see the decision as brilliant is that Levine and co have addressed a ACTUAL ISSUE with current gaming within their narrative.

WE ALL KNOW that the big money in games these days is in the annual or semi-annual sequel (I would prefer bioshock to be semi ?annual) and that publishers love milking established franchises as long as the next game continues to sell to a bigger audience each time *COUGH ASSASSINS CREED COUGH* and the ?infinite? idea that have put forward in BS:I really is a narrative loop that ALLOWS them to do this.

The fact that Levine has addressed what was likely to happen with the bioshock series real world sales/production schedule VIA an accepted in game narrative paradigm is just mind boggling to me and it really is pure genius!

The entire ?there is always a lighthouse, a man, and a city" paradigm will indeed lead to everyone always looking for the character that is Jack/Booker and the one that is Elizabeth/ Little Sister and the major enemy will be something Big Daddy/Songbird like, but that?s part of the ?bioshock paradigm? and good writers can come up with amazing concepts when there working with a paradigm, sometimes literary constrains can be a good thing as a definitive scope gives the artist bounds to work within and it makes it easier to shatter the paradigm when needed.

It could be a horrible thing and it could lead to the bioshock games becoming very boring very quickly as each new release is devoid of ?soul? but it could also lead to us all playing each new game with a predefined notions of ?how it?s all going to be? and that makes it even easier to screw with us as players when it comes to the story so once again I state that good writer?s will make all the difference.

And as you have all already pointed out there?s nothing original anymore as everything is built on a concept of what has come before and all the ground breaking themes we can apply to videogames have already been overused since the advent of the PSX.

Generally ill shut up about it now though as I?m starting to regurgitate the same basic crap in my posts so im out of stuff to say on the matter, at least the ?infinite bioshock? idea has been picked up and it seems most ppls get it

The ?future tunes? being sung in the style of the era of infinite was amazing, I literally stopped playing and just stood there listening/watching the black women singing fortunate sun the first time i came in contact with that moment, its after you bring the vox to dominance by doing the dimensional shift in chens shop, just before you come out and see the "booker hero of the vox" banner for the first time.

 

[McMindflayer]

I personally had a couple of problems with the ending to this game, not the themes presented, but just niggling problems.

WHY did they kill Booker? She was killing herself or, more accurately, causing herself not to exist. Why would booker want to kill himself? I understand passion of the moment of killing Comstock? but I mean, there are plenty of versions of himself that rescue her. I would say it's better to let her live a full life in some universes than to erase her from the timeline. If he was killing himself to save her that is. It could have been entirely selfish of not wanting to be comstock.

Let's go through your post point by point.

She kills Booker in all of the timelines where he accepts the baptism, meaning that Comstock is never "born". This would, in a way, kill Elizabeth, however she would still exist as Anna in all of the universes where Booker did not accept the baptism. This way, Comstock never existed, and Booker never sells his daughter to repay his debts.

I will have to disagree, as The point of the ending was killing Booker AND Comstock before the diverging timelines that are forever combined. This is shown when on his right is Elizabeth saying "He's Zachary Comstock" And on his left is Elizabeth saying "He's Booker Dewitt" and he replies "I'm Both" And then they drown him. They are killing both. Also, after he's drowned and it starts backing away, each Elizabeth fades away instead of using any tears to disappear. They went to the accumulation of all divergent paths and killed Booker before the choice happens.


As for the debate about how boring the game is going to get over time with the "A man, a lighthouse a city" motif. Have you played the Elder scrolls games? They start with a person who is in prison for an unknown crime who is released for an unknown reason. They turn out to be the most badass person ever and have to deal with gods and demons and dragons all the bloody time. If not all of them, then at least the last three had the same motif. Last I checked nobody has gotten bored with the fifth in the series...

Just saying, everyone who has any series generally have themes or motifs that apply to the game to make it feel like "their" game.

 

[Kael Arawn]

As for the debate about how boring the game is going to get over time with the "A man, a lighthouse a city" motif. Have you played the Elder scrolls games? They start with a person who is in prison for an unknown crime who is released for an unknown reason. They turn out to be the most badass person ever and have to deal with gods and demons and dragons all the bloody time. If not all of them, then at least the last three had the same motif. Last I checked nobody has gotten bored with the fifth in the series...

Just saying, everyone who has any series generally have themes or motifs that apply to the game to make it feel like "their" game.

Extremely well put sir, my hat goes of to you. I hope Levine's gamble pays off and bioshock continues to bring me and many other gamers as much entertainment as the elder scrolls series has for years to come.

Ah Daggerfall I will never forget you and how much of my life you ate away.....