Anyone else think the direction Levine went with the plot was cheap? (spoilers)

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. BioShock Infinite
  3. Anyone else think the direction Levine went with the plot was cheap? (spoilers)

User Info: ssj_duelist

4 years ago#21
Bottom line:The multiverse stuff was a cheap cop out when they wanted to force a plot twist on us after going through development issues during production due to internal complaints about the religious themes and tone.

Which is also the likely reason why the game looked so great at E3 years ago and have so much stuff that looked better than the actual stuff we got.

The plot became uninteresting, cheaply explained and half assed, as soon as we went through that first tear and never returned.

User Info: mad_hax_man

4 years ago#22
FernieODST posted...
It's not only the cheap "Multiverse" copout that bugged me. What bugged me most was how Ken Levine went from making a game about a city, to a game about Booker and Elizabeth, and then recently in an interview he just flat out said "Bioshock Infinite is all about Elizabeth. Burial at see is even more about Elizabeth". It's incredibly hard to get invested in a game when almost everything else is more interesting then Elizabeth. The fact that the overall point of tha game was to tell her story disappointed me. In my opinion, she isnt a very interesting character. Her powers are interesting to an extent, but as soon as they mention "Wish fulfillment" they tend to lose any meaning.

I didn't like Elizabeth, and many other people didn't either. So the game fell short for me. And I have a feeling that so will the DLC if he keeps trying to force Elizabeth on us.

The key to the original Bioshock was that that game used the city to explore Ryan. Levine was able to use one of the core gameplay elements, in this case, exploring a setting, and transform it into an exploration of a character and a theme.

And IMO, the two parts of BS:I that had the best story telling, the Museum segment and the Tower Segment, are the two segments that did this the best. The story telling in Infinite was at its weakest when the setting was brushed aside, which is of course when the dimension hoping party of the story began, and Columbia was pushed aside for talks about constants and variables.
"Hey bridesmaid, love the beard! Give's me something to hang onto!!"- Lord Flasheart

User Info: defacto00

4 years ago#23
You guys want to really be blown away?

"Applying the criterion to the brain, I used the typical mass of a neural transmitter molecule, its speed-based thermal motion, and the distance across the synapse to find mvd about two orders of magnitude too large for quantum effects to be necessarily present."

What this is saying is that quantum effects don't work on the brain. Which means that the entire basis for the game, whether or not Booker goes through with the baptism, is bullcrap. In the real world, he would have made the same choice every time.

User Info: IWBYD

4 years ago#24
Honestly I'm more disappointed that they've abandoned Columbia completely. So many unanswered questions about the city, but nope lets pander to fanboys and go back to Rapture.

I'm sick of Rapture. It's been 2 games. Let's put it to rest.

User Info: Minion3

4 years ago#25
Why does her not being hurt have to be explained? Why can't it just.. be?
Beings that are born of dreams must return to them...
The power of Lavos can make hopes and dreams come true.

User Info: grayfox1986

4 years ago#26
Here's something that occurred to me today while playing Burial at Sea.

What's the deal with vigors? If there are magic drinks that grant people super powers, why isn't everyone in Colombia after them (as everyone in Rapture was after Adam and Plasmids)? Especially since Vigors don't seem to have any of the negative side effects that heavy Adam use had

So.........why is it that Booker is the only person in Colombia who uses them? I guess you could bring up the Firemen and Crows, also Slate used shock jockey......but why weren't they all over the place?

And what the heck ARE they? They never even try to explain. At least Adam and Plasmids had a science-fictioney explanation for what they were and how they worked.

Anybody else bothered by this? Sorry I know it's a little off topic, but I figured we were all here in this topic to question plot holes.
"A cornered fox is more dangerous than a jackal"

User Info: rdh80

4 years ago#27
^I totally sympathize with you, man- the fact that they never explain what vigors (and salts for that matter) are really bothers me too. It's just another example of how lazy the world building and storytelling is compared to the original Bioshock.

You hit the nail on the head: why isn't everybody using these things? I've heard people use that one throwaway line at the carnival- "I'll wait till he (Fink) works out the kinks"- as an excuse for why, but that doesn't really hold up because unlike splicing, vigor consumption appears to have no ill effects, none mentioned at any rate. And salts aren't even mentioned by ANYONE outside of gameplay, it's as if they don't exist.

Adding to this, the explanation for why plasmids are now drinkable in Burial at Sea is so cheap! So Suchong stole it from Fink who stole it from Suchong? Fink stealing it from Suchong was, again, a lazy explanation in the first place, but Suchong ALSO stealing from Fink is just too much...

Also, why is it that Shock Jockey is not Electro-bolt, Old Man Winter is not Winter Blast, Devil's Kiss is not Incinerate, etc.? It's minor, I know, but if Burial at Sea is trying to sell this as the same Rapture is Bioshock One, it's not doing a very good job with continuity errors like these.

Speaking of Burial at Sea the "plot twist" was lame. It's in quotes because it's not really a twist, it's just the SAME twist repackaged. It's a formula. And it doesn't even make sense. How can there be any more Comstocks? Wasn't the whole point of drowning Booker was that there would be no more Comstocks, anywhere, ever?

And this is what bothers me about the Bioshock series now. Burial at Sea has shown us that Levine has not only decided to throw in the towel from a creative standpoint- by returning to Rapture rather than exploring Columbia or a new world- but even worse, that he has a formula for plots and he's sticking to it.

The meta-commentary of Bioshock Infinite about there always being a man, a lighthouse, a city and all the 'constants and variables' BS means that now for every new game, we will either be able to see things coming, or we will keep asking how this or that relates to Infinite, is this a constant, is this a variable, rather than enjoying the plot on it's own merits. In short, I feel the series was much stronger as a string of loose sequels rather than one big mess of a multiverse.

Sorry, I kind of went off on my own tangent. I had to get that off my chest.
"I avoided the major arteries. He'll probably live." - Wesley Wyndam-Pryce

User Info: grayfox1986

4 years ago#28
totally with you on this rdh80. I wondered the exact same thing about how the vigors from Colombia were now Plasmids but had the same name and function in BAS, but I wrote it off as one of those "constants and variables" things....still that's a pretty darn thin excuse for what was obviously done out of budgetary, time, and design constraints. Not that I expected them to make a whole new combat system for this small expansion, but it really does seem a bit forced.

And I also don't understand how this Comstock escaped Elizabeth's purge at Infinite's ending. Or how she was there with Comstock and the Luteces when they were wrestling baby Elizabeth away from Booker. Maybe something they'll touch on in episode 2?

One more small complaint. I was pretty disappointed that we went back to Rapture, but didn't hear from it's chief figure and founder, Andrew Ryan himself. From the first trailer I saw, I was really expecting, and looking forward to that.
"A cornered fox is more dangerous than a jackal"

User Info: rdh80

4 years ago#29
^Yeah, they have a lot of explaining to do for Episode 2 to say the least. My highest hope is that there will be some voiceover narration from Elizabeth before it starts stating why she's doing what she's doing, why Comstock is still alive, why he wanted Anna in the first place (was it for the same reason as before?), why Elizabeth cares about Sally etc.

But I really don't see how whatever explanation they come up with for the Comstock thing isn't going to cheapen Infinite's ending. And Ken Levine specifically said this takes place after the events in Infinite so it's not like it takes place before the ending of Infinite.

And I thought the Andrew Ryan thing was odd too. Seems like a missed opportunity. Next to Cohen, he was probably the most popular character from Bioshock 1. I thought it would be interesting for Ryan and "Comstock" (Booker) to meet, it would highlight their differences. I'm also kind of curious as to how Ryan carries himself in the public scene and how people behave when he's around, as unlike Comstock- at least before the end- Ryan wasn't cooped up in some House, he would stroll around Rapture and whatnot. Would he carry himself as if he were just like any other citizen of Rapture, or would he walk around high and mighty like a king?

I was also confused as to why there was, from what I can tell, absolutely no mention of Atlas, who I thought was a prominent figure. Again, it would be a nice contrast to the Daisy-Comstock feud to have the Atlas-Ryan feud.
"I avoided the major arteries. He'll probably live." - Wesley Wyndam-Pryce
  1. Boards
  2. BioShock Infinite
  3. Anyone else think the direction Levine went with the plot was cheap? (spoilers)

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived