My explanation to the ending of Infinite is somewhat different. Basically, Elizabeth went back in time, and drowned Booker before he became Comstock. Since Comstock is gone, Elizabeth won't exist, so she disappear one by one. But Elizabeth can only go back in time to drown Booker, if Comstock exists. Thus, the loop will only be created when Booker went though the baptism. So basically they killed all futures where Booker becomes Comstock, because in all futures where Booker becomes Comstock, Elizabeth will go back in time to drown Booker, thus creating a paradox. The only way to avoid this paradox, is for Booker to ALWAYS deny the baptism. Since Booker DOES NOT and CAN NOT choose to accept the baptism, Booker is forced by the universe to make the choice. Thus in the ending, we see Booker living a normal like with Anna. Because this is the only possible future now.
That's similar to my own, but more thought out. I stopped at "you can't go and destroy your own past", the classic grandfather paradox. I didn't really follow through to the point where non-baptized Booker gets to live.
Its soo polished. Its so good made, makes sence in some way, has perfect graphics, a story in its own way. BUT, it has no hope, it is logical enaugh to leave you going in circle in only way there is the only "fate" no matter what u do so leaves you with "what is the point of this, if u die surely". Just like dark souls. You have it all that this has and in the end, no hope, u die sacrificing for something that does not matter what is a few years of light and after ur soul burn, things g to death again like the nothingness and death is the creator and takes you back to itself which is nothing. The only everlasting hope there is and is in our reality in our world is Jesus Christ who promises us everlasting life and proves of his word that he is keeping to people today by speaking to his people, fulfilling the prophecies revealed to people and in his book and working trought people with the spirit gifts of healing ect. We have the answer all along, so why search for something other than the good news, perfect written, avaliable and true. Why don't search and find out about our reality and leave the nothingness consume itself.
That's the ending I concluded. Instead of your choices "not mattering," in the end, your choice to finish things is the thing that matters the most in order to secure the future in which the crazy corrupt city never happens (rapture/columbia, andrew/comstock never exist) thus securing Booker's normal life with his beloved daughter.
You made a mistake. The Luteces didn't wipe Booker's memories, his memories were altered from trauma due to traveling from one dimension to another. Edit: Also, the Elizabeths realize that they need to kill all of the Bookers/Comstocks, so they start going to other timelines and kill them too as seen in Burial at Sea.
Yeah, I saw the literal "anna?" Ending as there are Booker's out there who never contemplated baptism. Bookers who never were Pinkerton's never fought at wounded knee, ect. And with all of these things happening, the man still lives. Similar to how even if you could have stopped system shock, the idea likely would have come around anyway, just maybe not how we know it.
I like the idea that since Comstock never existed, the idea of the debt and the baptism never exist and in the end credits his future with his daughter is finally secured.
@Hunter Biden yeah but how far can constants and variables go? Perhaps there's a booker that never left the army, and fought in peking. My point is with an infinite number of worlds, theres an infinite number of possibilities. The farther you go from "world 1" the more different things are
They explain this in Burial at Sea but I didn’t understand the meta ending of BAS and exactly how everything ties together but it does. I really hope he adds on to this to include the DLC because it further links Rapture to Colombia
@@dadbodii my understanding was that burial at sea is the worst case scenario booker. He gets baptized. Becomes Comstock, yet his anna/Elizabeth is decapitated, rather than losing her finger. With no heir he loses his power in Columbia, because he can't create a prophecy about his heir taking his place. In his sorrows, Comstock becomes like booker again, and descends into rapture under the name booker. Because a Comstock still remains, Elizabeth (who appears to have beaten the Comstock of her universe, and created a idealized Paris in which she lives) learns of this, feels the need to stop him, because he killed an alternate child version of herself. In doing this Elizabeth is killed, and her secondary mission of saving a little sister (sally) fails. Another Elizabeth comes in to finish the job of the first, but the best she can do with rapture in full decay is to give Fontaine the ace in the hole, so he can send jack on his crusade, and Jack can eventually come and potentially save sally.
The concept of free will is something I find infinitely fascinating. It could be argued that either we do or we do not have free will but I feel that trying to directly answer the question is always insufficient to actually answering the question. At the end of the day though it’s all very amusing to just think of it as a chimp peeling a very complex banana.
This is the first review of bioshock that wasn't nonstop hating on the streamlined combat. You always find a new deep meta in something no one else could. Loved the video. Keep up the good work man!
I wouldn't really describe this as a review. It's just an essay/analysis on what Leadhead sees as the central theme of the game's narrative. If it were a review, he would probably have things to say (good and bad) about the gameplay, level design, sound design, etc.
@@artemisfowldragon I do too, and I still think there are things it does that are unique amongst FPS games to this day. But the main criticism of it from fans such as myself is the removal of the aspects that made BioShock 1 and 2's gameplay great. The interconnected map design that let you move around the level and lay traps and make strategies at your own pace is gone in favour of streamlined linear design that only occasionally opens up. The weapon wheel that lets you use your full arsenal and upgrade whichever weapon you want to specialise in has been dumped in favour of the 2 weapon limit and a very dry upgrade system with no genuinely interesting benefits other than speed and damage boosts. Automatons can't be hacked indefinitely, so you can't fully take control of a sector of the map anymore, the AI enemies don't roam around as often as they did in BioShock 1, there are few fewer Plasmids (Vigors) and most of them only have the function of doing damage (as opposed to utility Plasmids such as Scout, Cyclone Trap and Security Command) and there's no research. So overall, while Infinite is still an excellent shooter due to it's unique blend of guns and "magic" casting, with it's amazing sound design and aesthetics elevating it to truly cinematic levels, it's not longer the blend of FPS and immersive sim that made many BioShock fans fall in love with the first game. There's less strategy, less freedom and fewer opportunities to improvise and adapt to combat scenarios as before.
@@Grim_Pinata I agree with this but to an extent I think a lot of B1's survival horror mechanics would be out of place in Infinite's narrative which has significantly more urgency than its predecessors. It would have been cool to see more of it as Columbia deteriorated though.
Its soo polished. Its so good made, makes sence in some way, has perfect graphics, a story in its own way. BUT, it has no hope, it is logical enaugh to leave you going in circle in only way there is the only "fate" no matter what u do so leaves you with "what is the point of this, if u die surely". Just like dark souls. You have it all that this has and in the end, no hope, u die sacrificing for something that does not matter what is a few years of light and after ur soul burn, things g to death again like the nothingness and death is the creator and takes you back to itself which is nothing. The only everlasting hope there is and is in our reality in our world is Jesus Christ who promises us everlasting life and proves of his word that he is keeping to people today by speaking to his people, fulfilling the prophecies revealed to people and in his book and working trought people with the spirit gifts of healing ect. We have the answer all along, so why search for something other than the good news, perfect written, avaliable and true. Why don't search and find out about our reality and leave the nothingness consume itself.
I thought that too, until I realised that Booker is drowned before he ever decides. He says "I'm both", meaning he hadn't made the choice yet. Although it's definitely open to interpretation
@@davidgribble6313 Burial at Sea is fun. I liked some of the fan-service, but its story issues relate mostly to the fact that it's tied to a game that already has craters/holes when it comes to story. Honestly? it shouldn't have been tied Infinite in general and Booker and Elizabeth should've been new characters instead.
Once Comstock is gone, Booker's daughter is never taken from him (keep in mind comstock's evil intentions snd Booker changing his mind) and the only branching "Booker" timeline that can exist is where he lives out a normal life with his beloved daughter where there's no corrupt city or evil dictator (Bioshock 1 is a completely different branch you can't really change in Infinite, but Andrew is still technically "the man" variable).
A thoughtful analysis, and I haven't seen many retrospectives of Bioshock Infinite, so this was worth a watch. But I wonder how many people think of it as an immersive sim? Comparing Infinite with its predecessors, or indeed the Deus Ex and Dishonored series, is night and day. Also, as much as I loved the game on release, it's odd that the infinite multiverse idea boils down to the protagonist making one choice, and there being "constants and variables". Maybe Ken Levine very much intended this, but it comes across as a dissonance between concept and narrative.
this is a pretty well made video, but I have high doubts that Bioshock Infinite is one huge meta narrative on immersive sims. I do like the end note the video ends on, though.
It doesn't have to be written that way to have that meaning. The intention of the author only goes so far, and this is a completely valid reading on the meaning and themes of bioshock infinite
I think that the Booker in the post credits scene is one who neither accepted the baptism or sold Elizabeth. The reason he's still alive at the end of the game is because his version of Elizabeth never drowned him.
I think one’s definition of free will depends on their interpretation of time. Is time a linear progression, writing itself as we go along, or is the passage of time merely our brain’s way of shuffling along a preconceived timeline?
I personally don't believe in fate. If everything was predetermined, then what would be the point in living it? I've made many conscious decisions in life that have altered my life in very dramatic ways, and I'm able to know what my life would have been had I chosen otherwise The ripples of your actions depend on your place in life
Well, I'd say we have similar problem here, as with all time travels. Elizabeth kills Booker, so Elizabeth is never born, so there's nobody to kill Booker...
There's nothing wrong with games being formulaic and repeating structures. Most stories boil down to a handful of basic structures. They can still be fantastic and worth playing/watching/reading even if the ending is predictable.
A lot of love stories follow the same premise. They meet, get to know each other. Something bad happens, which causes a breakup, but one of them has a revelation that their love is worth fighting for, and a cinematic chase happens so thru can profess their love before its too late
An interesting piece to be sure. I find myself coming back to see people's thoughts on the ending having just watched a play through of it recently. When you were commenting on the after credits scene, I found a phrase to be very interesting in relation to what you were talking about. The phrase goes, and I will admit I don't remember where I heard it so I'm going to speak in a semi-quotation manner, "The past always finds a way to correct itself". Which when applied to the ending makes sense as to how a man who was drowned out of existence (in one interpretation) can suddenly be back in the end. I've seen people interpret the ending to mean that Elizabeth and Booker simply destroyed the branch of the timeline where Booker accepted the baptism, leaving only the Pinkerton Booker behind. The problem I find with that, and the game seems to agree, is how they were sure that eliminating that branch would do it. The Leuteces even mention as much at the notion, even mirroring the phrase above in a way. "Things is will still be set in motion" "How would someone know how far back to go." The way I see it, they don't. Let's say they went with the idea of taking out every Booker who ever fought in wounded knee, that way there is never a chance for him to have guilt for having fought and for the things he has done. Well what is to prevent a similarly large scale series of events to create the same split in time for Booker? Or let's take it from another angle. If they removed all Bookers before fighting in Wounded Knee, then maybe somebody else would have made those actions and fallen into those same regrets. Just an interesting piece to add to the pile of interesting thought pieces. Also if anybody recognizes the quoted phrase and can tell me where I got it, that would be great
Infinite's main gimmick is to confuse the hell out of the player. It tries to pass as a deep and interconnected world, but falls on its face, due to the glaring plot holes those connections present. Artists like to talk about their art, and make no mistake, creating video games is an art form. There are many comics, that comment on creating comics, there are a lot of movies, about making movies, and there are video games to tell you about programming video games. "Constants and Variables" right? Multiple branching paths all converging in the end (because meaningful choices, and branching narratives are apparently only possible in Japanese games). The last section is all about video game worlds. Then, the game just awkwardly ends, by using some flawed logic about multiverses. It's a very weak ending, where it is the solution (Booker's death) that's looking for a problem (some parallel Comstocks?), and not the other way around. And then "Burial a the Sea" came out and promptly ignored it.
Interestingly enough, I'm struggling to play My Summer Car ("open world" game about building your dream car from spare parts) as I often find myself with so many options, then my head starts to hurt until I eventually close the game.
I like to think the post-credit ending is a little more hopeful. Yes, Elizabeth(s) drowned booker so he couldn’t commit his sins. But in a universe of infinite possibilities, there had to be one booker that never made those choices, never did those things he so awfully regretted. So this booker wakes up after a fleeting dream of someone like himself, a story, a city in the sky, his daughter all grown up, of fire and war, and like one does after a nightmare regarding ones family, he rushes to check on her. His death in his dream meant that those possibilities have been closed for good, only versions of him that haven’t gone through with his sins remain, but our Elizabeth and booker made just enough of a difference running through the multiverse and closing those possibilities to give us one last glimpse, a dream, of what it all could have been, just so that booker appreciates Anna more. I dunno, it’s just an idea.
Wow, even after playing the game multiple times sometime ago and watching this essay, that is, in a way, a reanalysis and an interpretation/explanation of the ending and of the entire game's philosophy, it still gives me a headache from all the mind-bending reasonings😵😵
I have a bird cage tattoo on my body because of this. Booker never even had the choice to kill himself or comstock because he was the booker that would right his wrongs given any chance. The lack of agency didn’t prevent booker from deciding the outcome. Our booker is the one that ended it all
There are many takes on free will Perhaps we'll try to find meaning and answers to questions, only to completely miss what the original question was in the first place, questions branched out to more questions, and it's answers, to even more questions that change said answers Everything that begins will have an ending, so why begin at all? While it may sound nihilistic, the human condition is more tenacious than it makes itself to be I could search for the meaning of existence, even if there might very well no meaning to it all. Yet that search, in itself, would ironically become *the* meaning in the end
A great vid man, that music in the outro, the one that plays when you first see Columbia, it always puts me off, it’s nice, but uneasy to me, all the bio shock games have music like that, familiar but unnerving melodies
I tried to replay Infinite recently and I found out that I didn't enjoy the story or the characters anymore but after watching this video I can appreciate this game again :) I haven't thought about looking at the ending in a meta way and it's really interesting! I loved your Bioshock 1 and Prey video too, I'm surprised you don't have more views, all of your videos are just so good
Interesting take but it doesn't save the game. Starting a story with such a rich combination of themes such as nationalism, ancestor worship, puritanical religiosity, demagoguery, racism, and revolution, all so deeply rooted in American culture, and then throwing it away for a silly multiverse ending is a tragedy. It's like if Bioshock 1 had ended with Andrew Ryan turning out to be an alien monster or something
I think the post-credit sequence being a hint that they didn't end the cycle of Bookers and Comstocks is very intentional, as this lines up well with the Buried at Sea dlc. It stars the Elizabeth our player sees in the main campaign that's off hunting Comstocks, meaning she was still searching for a way to get rid of the Comstocks
Deus Ex Human Revolution maybe? It isn't stuck in one city, yes it still has the tech consumption, but i think it looks at it less sinesterly then the way most of these other references do. And it has definet immersive sim elements, along with the original deus ex. Possibly Cyberpunk 2077 when it comes out but we have to wait to see it when it comes out to know
@@gmilh it's not immersive sim, tho. Thing is, what's called out in this video defines immersive sim genre which means going against those tropes automatically means you lose your genre affiliation. And arguably bioshock infinite is not immersive sim as it features linear corridor-like levels and lack of meaningful choice gameplay-wise. It's a shooter.
@@LedoCool1 I think what makes an immersive sim has to do with systems within the game that interact with the setting in a way that makes sense within the setting. Inputs of these systems being multifunctional. Like in breath of the wild consider the uses of fire. Or in bioshock with the whole throwing lightning.
The biggest issue with the narrative and by proxy the meta-narrative is what it turns the franchise into; like Skynet and Judgement Day being an eventuality in the Terminator franchise, it turns the events of the Infinite and the previous two games from being an adventure into being a chore you have no say in that needs to be completed.
Very interesting video, as someone who always took the ending literally this made me rethink my opinion on the game a little. Although I still dislike infinite, I’m glad for this new perspective.
Great video! There's one problem though: Only BioShock and BioShock Infinite can exist in the same game universe, because one of the constants that Elizabeth mentions is that there's always a lighthouse.
always amuses me that whenever any story development brings up infinite choices/universes/whatevers at how incredibly narrow minded they make the subject
That seems like a natural consequence of the medium. Every choice, every outcome, every consequence has to be thought of and created first. In this sense video games are little more than extremely sophisticated Choose Your Own Adventure books.
Not sure if you watched the film, Arrival. It's not perfect, but I think it beautifully illustrates the concept of understanding time, free will, and how one will still embrace all of it. The short story that the film is based on is more in depth, so I suggest reading and watching them both
in the end credit scene there is a calendar that says the date is October 8th 1893, the exact date when Anna was taken from booker so it could just be a flash back, it doesn't mean the he is still alive, although i'm sure that plenty of bookers did survive. I guess it's just open to interpretation.
I personally believe that the whole “unlimited possibilities” timelines is a near impossible plot point to nail in video gaming, as the player base’s imagination will ultimately always be able to find a flaw in the story. But I guess that imperfection is another beautiful addition
I know its late but bear with me: even though its done in reverse, the far cry games (2-5, specifically 3 and 4) seem to operate super similarly in terms of format. Some seemingly normal person comes to a foreign land through the "lighthouse" to complete a seemingly simple goal (Jason clubbing and skydiving to the Rook islands to vacation, Ajay taking a bus to Kyrat) and are thrown into a world of violence and bossed around (Jason forced to kill his way through the island and bossed around, Ajay forced to fight with the rebel army to avoid being executed, the mercenary plunging into the civil war), slowly delving into the insanity of the land and succumbing to same vices as the locals did long ago (enjoying the violence and drug fueled benders in 3, killing solely diamonds and guns in 2), queuing the hidden connection you have with the setting (Jason being the destined warrior of the land, the Jackal following you all along before the game even began, Ajay being the almost step-son of Pagan MIn, Joseph foreseeing your arrival), and finally the betrayal of the person you followed for so long (Jason killing Citra/friends, Ajay killing Min and one of the militia leaders, The mercenary betraying the armies and dying with the jackal). Its interesting how it follows the same beats but in a different order at times and can still work quite well.
in my interpretation, the booker from de post credits scene is a booker that never even got to the baptism. I think that the point of killing booker in the baptism is killing all the universes that came from that choice. the constant was that booker did something in the baptism, the variable is what he did. if he did died in the baptism, then he never choose to leave or to go with it, therefore all the Comstock and Booker (that we play with) die as well. so that leaves us with the bookers that never got to make that choice, and could live with their family.
i think to erase history is to erase time itself. If you wanted to get rid of Booker having that child all together, you would make sure that his parents never met, maybe even their parents parents. killing him after his birth for example wouldnt work because there could be a alternative timeline already where he got born somewhere else and still go the same direction as the other Booker. you would have to go back far and basically change history on a big scale and even THEN you cant be sure that Booker has Elizabeth.
I have this idea that ours is not only Booker that gets drowned. When we are approached by the other Elizabeths, none of then are our Elizabeth - I'll call her Elizabeth Prime -. Of the seven Elizabeths, at least 6 must know Booker, and we do see two alternate versions of him and Elizabeth in the Sea of Doors. This could mean that at least 6 other Bookers were drowned. Maybe these Bookers, the ones who survived Columbia, were drowned simultaneously to better ensure Comstock would cease to exist. But one wasn't, which could be why there is still a reality where Comstock tried to take Anna away.
I see these patterns/formulas in movies too. I make a game of predicting them. The farther from my predictions that games and movies get, the more replay value they have
The issue is Booker doesn't really potentially become Comstock until the Battle at Wounded Knee. So they wouldn't even had to drown him, just find some way to prevent him from taking part in the battle.
There may be other battles that he has participated in though. We know that his actions are his kneejerk and that other battles can set him off down the same path.
@@InvaderTak176 That would heavily contradict the standard that the narrative is trying to establish though. Not to mention that its wildly contrived. There are certain constants that are present throughout each timeline, and one of, if not the most prominent ones is Booker fighting at Wounded Knee. And even if he were to potentially become Comstock due to other battles, all Elizabeth would have to do is just sabotage Booker to get him discharged from the army. Everyone thinks incorporating multi-verse into writing is so clever, but in all honesty its just incredibly lazy. You experience the whole game through (primarily) one specific time line, only to later learn that there are infinite time lines. Which makes you wonder why you should even care about what's happening in the one your currently experiencing?
@@spencercoles1800 I would say no partially to your reply (not on a narrative level, I agree with that, just simply on a technical established rule level) because you can technically even go farther back than that even and get Booker's mother to not concieve booker thus negating Booker and Comstock altogether, same with Elizabeth. There are an infinite amount of universes with Booker as it would be without Booker; the universes we focus on however are the specific universes that do follow a close enough timeline for Elizabeth to interviene and have powers with. At the end of infinite, we show only a handful of Elizabeths, so I am assuming that that is only the handful of universes where either Elizabeth cares, does something against Comstock, or has powers. Ps I think that is why Rick and Morty has become pppular since it does make fun of mutiverse tropes.
As someone who has no idea about metal gear? games, the sentence "liquid snake trying to prove that he's better than his brother, solid snake" was absolutely bonkers!
Maybe the Bookers who would have chosen tails were also the ones that never chose to sell his girl and try to bring her back. And the ones that choose heads were the ones with the personality to have brought him to that point?
This all reminds me of the Half Life 2 conundrum following the end of the Combine and bringing order to the universe (Gman's faction). With Gman and his benefactors being the only other powerful beings in the universe as a threat to the combine, Humanity would inevitably take the combine's spot. Gordon Freeman, demonstrating that he is an extraordinary agent of the Gman, would end up being a threat to Gman's benefactors. The paradox of free will vs oppressive order comes through the form of whether Gordan and humanity should be put in their place, just as they did with the Combine (but with Gman's faction) or doom the universe by creating a vacuum of the power that the combine and Gman have once taken, creating a chaotic universe with never ending constants, creating a reason for an oppresive regime in the first place?
Liquid's goal was not to prove he's better than Solid. His goal was to realize the vision of Big Boss. He believed he was the rightful successor to Big Boss and his legacy. Therefor the strive for the reimplementation of the Nuclear Deterrent.
I see it more as the only one responsible for our actions is . . . us. Booker choosing to let himself be drowned is him accepting that responsibility, because whatever he does to shun that responsibility leads to hurt for both him and everyone he knows. Only once he accepts just what he has done can there be a chance for him to make another, better choice in life.
Sayng that there is no reason to continue the System Shock formula is of little consequence, almost insulting, and would be quite arrogant. It's likely enough that every story that shall be imagined by people in our lifetime has already been told by someone before, potentially by someone well forgotten. Maybe it was overlooked because it came before we were ready to listen. Maybe it was overlooked because of quality of execution. This is why Prey had to be made, because you're listening, and to refine the execution, and this is why another *Shock will be made, to refine the execution again. The arrogant bit would be to suggest that the topic is exhausted and that no quality improvement can be made. In fact Bioshock Infinite feels remarkably stale and bad in gameplay compared to prior games. Maybe they were just tired. Maybe it doesn't mean anything. So you have to conclude, either the statement that the creators want to bury the Shock formula speaks of their exceptional arrogance, or maybe you're overanalysing and no such meaning was intended. The quality of execution is often the defining factor in a piece of entertainment. Illusionism, stage magic - watch it. Watch Lance Burton do his doves and candles routine. Do you think it's only magical because you don"t know how he does it, so it seems impossible? You have it on video frame by frame. You have a logical brain. You know EXACTLY how every of his moves must work if you just spend a few seconds. And yet, it's no less fascinating. Just because you know how he does it, doesn"t bring you a step closer to being able to do it yourself, and if you learn diligently for years and approach the level of mastery, your respect can only grow. In ballet, there is no surprise, you know the moves. In theatre, in opera, you know every word. And the connoisseur will watch again. You replay these games the 8th time now, and they haven't changed in the interim. At all. But the quality of execution is sufficient to satisfy you and inspire you again.
Great video, very interesting points you brought up. Did you take into account that the beta version of Infinite was completely a different game ?. A lot of content was cut out or change from what we got in vanilla. still very good video, i enjoy your content.
I assumed that after the death of pre batism booker was killed for no reason because of the end cutscene where booker walks in annas room, where i though he was gonna sell her again.
It fascinates me that this game came out the same year as The Last of Us, which had a controversial ending due to a lack of player choice. That game says "it doesn't matter what the player would do, this is what Joel would do" and then this game is saying "here are choices, but none of them actually affect anything"
I really wonder if the same kind of argument could be developed regarding From Software games. There are so many structural and thematic parallels between them that it's really tempting to try and understanding them as somehow being part of the same "multi-verse" (i.e. not the same world but the same set of possible worlds according to an almost axiomatic set of ideas)
The meta-narrative in the Leadhead-universe says that the author might've gotten too stuck with authors wanting to kill their creations idea. "The System Shock-formula" can't be strected that far either imo, I really wouldn't consider Half-Life part of that lineage instead placing it in the progenitors of the linear tactical fps.
The luteces never brainwashed you, I just played it recently and the say that by pulling you across dimensions that your mind fills in the gaps themselves they didn't do anything to the players memories.
I'm fully aware of multiverse theory and everything, but someone answer me this. Say the beginning of Infinite is the Prime universe, the main one, where DeWitt sells Anna to Comstock and the Lutece's, and is sent to bring her back to wipe away the debt. We see the tear open up and everything to see the sequence to confirm that he did sell Anna/Elizabeth. How did Columbia form in the same prime universe as the one Booker is in without there being transportation through different universes?
I think its because the "circle" as the games calls it, starts not when booker sells her, but when he has to choose if he gets baptized or not.. so if he does, he transforms into Comstock, and if not, he is the Booker that sells Anna...
The truth of free will... I can't give you a definitive truth. But, I can tell you a possibility that may be true. Choosing left or right, regardless, you as Booker have a destination. One. Heads or tails, is a good show of character if you eliminate most of the other variables that may influence a different choice. I mean, he must have seen the score board but chooses heads anyway. As in, it didn't matter to him, he was giving what he wanted to pick. To feel like your fate is set in stone, is because your own character has no desire for change, or may not change even if you want to. You are who you are, a future based on that. If you don't change, then why would your future? Comstock compared to martyred Booker may seem very different, but both are part of who Booker is. He had both of them in him, it just shows what would be if he felt more guilty and craved the a real chance to make amends (which is something already within our Booker) while the other is the side that embraces his horrible thoughts. Booker always chose heads because the version of him who sold his kid was also the version of him who chose head. He choices led him there, bit the shallow choices that can go either way or gets him to where he needs to go. If he had chosen tails for some crazy reason, like, he had a friend that always chose tails and was seen as a something lucky that kept him alive for whatever reason. If all that was the case and influence, then it would take a whole lot more timelines to find such order if events. And in the timeline, would that even be Booker? And, would he even be in the situation where he would get the chance to pick?
I think the literal ending for Infinite isn't that every Booker AND Comstock is dying, just the Comstocks. The priest offers the Baptism, and he doesn't say 'no,' he dies while under water. But Booker, in the timelines that he doesn't become Comstock, says 'no.' I think Booker dying in the Baptismal waters is meant to be the multi-dimensional/multi-timeline stand-in for every Booker turned Comstock, eliminating every Elizabeth and saving every Anna. That's why the central one doesn't disappear (she's not ""our"" Elizabeth, she's got no pendant), and how the baby in the crib could still be in the crib.
They should of stuck with 2 timelines. That would have solved a lot of problems. Why show us all possible worlds which are actually near clones of each other? Also why would A daughter want to kill their father? Isn’t that suicide? It is interesting how we play the game game outside our own timeline. It’s also interesting how Elizs pinky being in another world gives her powers, although that’s also kinda crazy. BTW the Luteces are the same person, female in one world male in another.
Elizabeth(1) drowned Booker(1). all the potential Bookers and Comstocks that Booker(1) could have been ceased to be possible. That doesn't mean that ALL possible Bookers and Comstocks ceased though, after all, hypothetically, Elizabeth(2) couldn't bring herself to kill Booker(2) one universe over, leaving Booker(2) to choose baptism or refusal. and Elizabeth(3) tried to drown Booker(3) but he didn't wanna drown, and so chose to fight back, and escaped. so when a Booker sacrifices himself for Elizabeth, he and his future selves cease to exist, but his alternate selves aren't effected. Hope that makes as much sense to you guys as it makes sense to me at 1 in the morning :P
If there’s a timeline where the Elizabeth’s did go back and kill booker there would also be a timeline where they didn’t so maybe they killed half the bookers
When Ryan told me to kill him I turned off the game and never finished.
A man chooses, a slave obeys.
You chose wisely my friend.
i changed my controller to player 2, so Ryan/Fontaine couldnt control me anymore
@@drabnail777 Sounds like the MGS Mantis fight. That shit changed my life.
Philosophical Suicide
Youve been obeying for a lot longer than than, son. There is no such thing as choice really.
My explanation to the ending of Infinite is somewhat different.
Basically, Elizabeth went back in time, and drowned Booker before he became Comstock. Since Comstock is gone, Elizabeth won't exist, so she disappear one by one.
But Elizabeth can only go back in time to drown Booker, if Comstock exists. Thus, the loop will only be created when Booker went though the baptism.
So basically they killed all futures where Booker becomes Comstock, because in all futures where Booker becomes Comstock, Elizabeth will go back in time to drown Booker, thus creating a paradox.
The only way to avoid this paradox, is for Booker to ALWAYS deny the baptism. Since Booker DOES NOT and CAN NOT choose to accept the baptism, Booker is forced by the universe to make the choice.
Thus in the ending, we see Booker living a normal like with Anna. Because this is the only possible future now.
I like this a lot. Much happier ending lol
That's similar to my own, but more thought out. I stopped at "you can't go and destroy your own past", the classic grandfather paradox. I didn't really follow through to the point where non-baptized Booker gets to live.
They created a grandfather paradox.
Its soo polished. Its so good made, makes sence in some way, has perfect graphics, a story in its own way. BUT, it has no hope, it is logical enaugh to leave you going in circle in only way there is the only "fate" no matter what u do so leaves you with "what is the point of this, if u die surely". Just like dark souls. You have it all that this has and in the end, no hope, u die sacrificing for something that does not matter what is a few years of light and after ur soul burn, things g to death again like the nothingness and death is the creator and takes you back to itself which is nothing. The only everlasting hope there is and is in our reality in our world is Jesus Christ who promises us everlasting life and proves of his word that he is keeping to people today by speaking to his people, fulfilling the prophecies revealed to people and in his book and working trought people with the spirit gifts of healing ect. We have the answer all along, so why search for something other than the good news, perfect written, avaliable and true. Why don't search and find out about our reality and leave the nothingness consume itself.
That's the ending I concluded. Instead of your choices "not mattering," in the end, your choice to finish things is the thing that matters the most in order to secure the future in which the crazy corrupt city never happens (rapture/columbia, andrew/comstock never exist) thus securing Booker's normal life with his beloved daughter.
" Rather than offer you the illusion of free will I have taken the liberty of *choosing for you* " - Gman
You made a mistake. The Luteces didn't wipe Booker's memories, his memories were altered from trauma due to traveling from one dimension to another.
Edit: Also, the Elizabeths realize that they need to kill all of the Bookers/Comstocks, so they start going to other timelines and kill them too as seen in Burial at Sea.
I think that was one of the things he talked about in the A/N
Yeah, I saw the literal "anna?" Ending as there are Booker's out there who never contemplated baptism. Bookers who never were Pinkerton's never fought at wounded knee, ect. And with all of these things happening, the man still lives.
Similar to how even if you could have stopped system shock, the idea likely would have come around anyway, just maybe not how we know it.
I like the idea that since Comstock never existed, the idea of the debt and the baptism never exist and in the end credits his future with his daughter is finally secured.
@@glassofwater281 but it won't be a happy one
@Hunter Biden yeah but how far can constants and variables go? Perhaps there's a booker that never left the army, and fought in peking. My point is with an infinite number of worlds, theres an infinite number of possibilities. The farther you go from "world 1" the more different things are
They explain this in Burial at Sea but I didn’t understand the meta ending of BAS and exactly how everything ties together but it does. I really hope he adds on to this to include the DLC because it further links Rapture to Colombia
@@dadbodii my understanding was that burial at sea is the worst case scenario booker. He gets baptized. Becomes Comstock, yet his anna/Elizabeth is decapitated, rather than losing her finger. With no heir he loses his power in Columbia, because he can't create a prophecy about his heir taking his place.
In his sorrows, Comstock becomes like booker again, and descends into rapture under the name booker. Because a Comstock still remains, Elizabeth (who appears to have beaten the Comstock of her universe, and created a idealized Paris in which she lives) learns of this, feels the need to stop him, because he killed an alternate child version of herself.
In doing this Elizabeth is killed, and her secondary mission of saving a little sister (sally) fails. Another Elizabeth comes in to finish the job of the first, but the best she can do with rapture in full decay is to give Fontaine the ace in the hole, so he can send jack on his crusade, and Jack can eventually come and potentially save sally.
Just wanna say man I barely found your channel and your essays deserve a lot more attention
The concept of free will is something I find infinitely fascinating. It could be argued that either we do or we do not have free will but I feel that trying to directly answer the question is always insufficient to actually answering the question. At the end of the day though it’s all very amusing to just think of it as a chimp peeling a very complex banana.
This is the first review of bioshock that wasn't nonstop hating on the streamlined combat. You always find a new deep meta in something no one else could. Loved the video. Keep up the good work man!
I wouldn't really describe this as a review. It's just an essay/analysis on what Leadhead sees as the central theme of the game's narrative. If it were a review, he would probably have things to say (good and bad) about the gameplay, level design, sound design, etc.
Wait people don’t like the fast combat? I goddamm love it
@@artemisfowldragon I do too, and I still think there are things it does that are unique amongst FPS games to this day. But the main criticism of it from fans such as myself is the removal of the aspects that made BioShock 1 and 2's gameplay great.
The interconnected map design that let you move around the level and lay traps and make strategies at your own pace is gone in favour of streamlined linear design that only occasionally opens up. The weapon wheel that lets you use your full arsenal and upgrade whichever weapon you want to specialise in has been dumped in favour of the 2 weapon limit and a very dry upgrade system with no genuinely interesting benefits other than speed and damage boosts.
Automatons can't be hacked indefinitely, so you can't fully take control of a sector of the map anymore, the AI enemies don't roam around as often as they did in BioShock 1, there are few fewer Plasmids (Vigors) and most of them only have the function of doing damage (as opposed to utility Plasmids such as Scout, Cyclone Trap and Security Command) and there's no research.
So overall, while Infinite is still an excellent shooter due to it's unique blend of guns and "magic" casting, with it's amazing sound design and aesthetics elevating it to truly cinematic levels, it's not longer the blend of FPS and immersive sim that made many BioShock fans fall in love with the first game. There's less strategy, less freedom and fewer opportunities to improvise and adapt to combat scenarios as before.
@@artemisfowldragon Infinite’s combat is dope
@@Grim_Pinata I agree with this but to an extent I think a lot of B1's survival horror mechanics would be out of place in Infinite's narrative which has significantly more urgency than its predecessors. It would have been cool to see more of it as Columbia deteriorated though.
This is some quality stuff.
Its soo polished. Its so good made, makes sence in some way, has perfect graphics, a story in its own way. BUT, it has no hope, it is logical enaugh to leave you going in circle in only way there is the only "fate" no matter what u do so leaves you with "what is the point of this, if u die surely". Just like dark souls. You have it all that this has and in the end, no hope, u die sacrificing for something that does not matter what is a few years of light and after ur soul burn, things g to death again like the nothingness and death is the creator and takes you back to itself which is nothing. The only everlasting hope there is and is in our reality in our world is Jesus Christ who promises us everlasting life and proves of his word that he is keeping to people today by speaking to his people, fulfilling the prophecies revealed to people and in his book and working trought people with the spirit gifts of healing ect. We have the answer all along, so why search for something other than the good news, perfect written, avaliable and true. Why don't search and find out about our reality and leave the nothingness consume itself.
Welcome to the channel
@@seven7upndown241 I think he’s talking about the video
@@tylerparsons2564 The video is about the game 😋
I think your analysis is extremely interesting, but needs recontextualisation with the burial at sea DLC...
I thought that only Comstock Universe Booker died and so the Booker that refused the baptism never sold Anna
I thought that too, until I realised that Booker is drowned before he ever decides. He says "I'm both", meaning he hadn't made the choice yet. Although it's definitely open to interpretation
@@MemeMachinist Burial at sea one of my favorite dlcs ever.
Gameplay wise, yes. Narrative wise, no. Just my opinion
@@davidgribble6313 Burial at Sea is fun. I liked some of the fan-service, but its story issues relate mostly to the fact that it's tied to a game that already has craters/holes when it comes to story. Honestly? it shouldn't have been tied Infinite in general and Booker and Elizabeth should've been new characters instead.
Once Comstock is gone, Booker's daughter is never taken from him (keep in mind comstock's evil intentions snd Booker changing his mind) and the only branching "Booker" timeline that can exist is where he lives out a normal life with his beloved daughter where there's no corrupt city or evil dictator (Bioshock 1 is a completely different branch you can't really change in Infinite, but Andrew is still technically "the man" variable).
A thoughtful analysis, and I haven't seen many retrospectives of Bioshock Infinite, so this was worth a watch.
But I wonder how many people think of it as an immersive sim? Comparing Infinite with its predecessors, or indeed the Deus Ex and Dishonored series, is night and day.
Also, as much as I loved the game on release, it's odd that the infinite multiverse idea boils down to the protagonist making one choice, and there being "constants and variables". Maybe Ken Levine very much intended this, but it comes across as a dissonance between concept and narrative.
Another great video! Love the way you do your intro and outro texts. It really adds great detail to the videos.
Thanks! The intros and the outros are definitely the most time consuming parts, but I just love em
this is a pretty well made video, but I have high doubts that Bioshock Infinite is one huge meta narrative on immersive sims. I do like the end note the video ends on, though.
It doesn't have to be written that way to have that meaning. The intention of the author only goes so far, and this is a completely valid reading on the meaning and themes of bioshock infinite
I think that the Booker in the post credits scene is one who neither accepted the baptism or sold Elizabeth. The reason he's still alive at the end of the game is because his version of Elizabeth never drowned him.
I think one’s definition of free will depends on their interpretation of time. Is time a linear progression, writing itself as we go along, or is the passage of time merely our brain’s way of shuffling along a preconceived timeline?
@Jack Squat Mind linking whatever article/study/etc you're talking about? Sounds like an interesting read
@Jack Squat Sauce, pls
I personally don't believe in fate. If everything was predetermined, then what would be the point in living it?
I've made many conscious decisions in life that have altered my life in very dramatic ways, and I'm able to know what my life would have been had I chosen otherwise
The ripples of your actions depend on your place in life
You just described what "Heaven" is to Enrico Pucci, Stone Ocean's Main Antagonist.
@Löm stone ocean hasnt even been animated yet dude
Löm no u
Löm Man I love jojo. Ignore the fans, watch the show and then become one of them. Join us brother. Help us post cringe
Well, I'd say we have similar problem here, as with all time travels. Elizabeth kills Booker, so Elizabeth is never born, so there's nobody to kill Booker...
Years later and I am finding new interpretations of my favorite game. Great job man.
There's nothing wrong with games being formulaic and repeating structures. Most stories boil down to a handful of basic structures. They can still be fantastic and worth playing/watching/reading even if the ending is predictable.
A lot of love stories follow the same premise. They meet, get to know each other. Something bad happens, which causes a breakup, but one of them has a revelation that their love is worth fighting for, and a cinematic chase happens so thru can profess their love before its too late
An interesting piece to be sure. I find myself coming back to see people's thoughts on the ending having just watched a play through of it recently. When you were commenting on the after credits scene, I found a phrase to be very interesting in relation to what you were talking about. The phrase goes, and I will admit I don't remember where I heard it so I'm going to speak in a semi-quotation manner, "The past always finds a way to correct itself". Which when applied to the ending makes sense as to how a man who was drowned out of existence (in one interpretation) can suddenly be back in the end.
I've seen people interpret the ending to mean that Elizabeth and Booker simply destroyed the branch of the timeline where Booker accepted the baptism, leaving only the Pinkerton Booker behind. The problem I find with that, and the game seems to agree, is how they were sure that eliminating that branch would do it. The Leuteces even mention as much at the notion, even mirroring the phrase above in a way. "Things is will still be set in motion" "How would someone know how far back to go."
The way I see it, they don't. Let's say they went with the idea of taking out every Booker who ever fought in wounded knee, that way there is never a chance for him to have guilt for having fought and for the things he has done. Well what is to prevent a similarly large scale series of events to create the same split in time for Booker? Or let's take it from another angle. If they removed all Bookers before fighting in Wounded Knee, then maybe somebody else would have made those actions and fallen into those same regrets.
Just an interesting piece to add to the pile of interesting thought pieces.
Also if anybody recognizes the quoted phrase and can tell me where I got it, that would be great
Hey man, love your work on the videos and the way you use music and sound!
I never saw how the level design was itself a communication of pre destination / constants and variants. Very cool!
This is the single most philosophical video about a game I've ever watched.
Infinite's main gimmick is to confuse the hell out of the player. It tries to pass as a deep and interconnected world, but falls on its face, due to the glaring plot holes those connections present.
Artists like to talk about their art, and make no mistake, creating video games is an art form. There are many comics, that comment on creating comics, there are a lot of movies, about making movies, and there are video games to tell you about programming video games. "Constants and Variables" right? Multiple branching paths all converging in the end (because meaningful choices, and branching narratives are apparently only possible in Japanese games). The last section is all about video game worlds.
Then, the game just awkwardly ends, by using some flawed logic about multiverses. It's a very weak ending, where it is the solution (Booker's death) that's looking for a problem (some parallel Comstocks?), and not the other way around. And then "Burial a the Sea" came out and promptly ignored it.
Interestingly enough, I'm struggling to play My Summer Car ("open world" game about building your dream car from spare parts) as I often find myself with so many options, then my head starts to hurt until I eventually close the game.
I like to think the post-credit ending is a little more hopeful. Yes, Elizabeth(s) drowned booker so he couldn’t commit his sins. But in a universe of infinite possibilities, there had to be one booker that never made those choices, never did those things he so awfully regretted. So this booker wakes up after a fleeting dream of someone like himself, a story, a city in the sky, his daughter all grown up, of fire and war, and like one does after a nightmare regarding ones family, he rushes to check on her. His death in his dream meant that those possibilities have been closed for good, only versions of him that haven’t gone through with his sins remain, but our Elizabeth and booker made just enough of a difference running through the multiverse and closing those possibilities to give us one last glimpse, a dream, of what it all could have been, just so that booker appreciates Anna more. I dunno, it’s just an idea.
Your videos popped into my recommended a couple days ago, haven’t stopped watching since. Thank you for the amazing content
Wow, even after playing the game multiple times sometime ago and watching this essay, that is, in a way, a reanalysis and an interpretation/explanation of the ending and of the entire game's philosophy, it still gives me a headache from all the mind-bending reasonings😵😵
That's a reason I love the games. I love the philosophy of them and that people interpret their meaning differently.
Man what a haunting video and analysis of Infinite. I am speechless.
I have a bird cage tattoo on my body because of this. Booker never even had the choice to kill himself or comstock because he was the booker that would right his wrongs given any chance. The lack of agency didn’t prevent booker from deciding the outcome. Our booker is the one that ended it all
Theres peace in the idea that the only choice you make is who you want to be
There are many takes on free will
Perhaps we'll try to find meaning and answers to questions, only to completely miss what the original question was in the first place, questions branched out to more questions, and it's answers, to even more questions that change said answers
Everything that begins will have an ending, so why begin at all?
While it may sound nihilistic, the human condition is more tenacious than it makes itself to be
I could search for the meaning of existence, even if there might very well no meaning to it all.
Yet that search, in itself, would ironically become *the* meaning in the end
The Lettuce "twins" didn't wipe his memory but everything else is a spot on and excellent analysis, well done.
A great vid man, that music in the outro, the one that plays when you first see Columbia, it always puts me off, it’s nice, but uneasy to me, all the bio shock games have music like that, familiar but unnerving melodies
I tried to replay Infinite recently and I found out that I didn't enjoy the story or the characters anymore but after watching this video I can appreciate this game again :) I haven't thought about looking at the ending in a meta way and it's really interesting! I loved your Bioshock 1 and Prey video too, I'm surprised you don't have more views, all of your videos are just so good
Interesting take but it doesn't save the game. Starting a story with such a rich combination of themes such as nationalism, ancestor worship, puritanical religiosity, demagoguery, racism, and revolution, all so deeply rooted in American culture, and then throwing it away for a silly multiverse ending is a tragedy. It's like if Bioshock 1 had ended with Andrew Ryan turning out to be an alien monster or something
Man you need more than 200 subscribers
I've seen the ending millions of times...
How did I just figure out about the Little Sister/Elizabeth Parallel?
I think the post-credit sequence being a hint that they didn't end the cycle of Bookers and Comstocks is very intentional, as this lines up well with the Buried at Sea dlc. It stars the Elizabeth our player sees in the main campaign that's off hunting Comstocks, meaning she was still searching for a way to get rid of the Comstocks
I've always hated Fontaine for torturing Elizabeth. How could anyone destroy someone wirh that much beauty?
I beat Infinite 4 times and never noticed the little sister crying over the big daddy at the end
This is amazing analysis, love your work!
Would you point it out how an immersive sim that is not "system shock" would look like?
Deus Ex Human Revolution maybe? It isn't stuck in one city, yes it still has the tech consumption, but i think it looks at it less sinesterly then the way most of these other references do. And it has definet immersive sim elements, along with the original deus ex. Possibly Cyberpunk 2077 when it comes out but we have to wait to see it when it comes out to know
Space Station 13?
Undertale?
@@gmilh it's not immersive sim, tho. Thing is, what's called out in this video defines immersive sim genre which means going against those tropes automatically means you lose your genre affiliation. And arguably bioshock infinite is not immersive sim as it features linear corridor-like levels and lack of meaningful choice gameplay-wise. It's a shooter.
@@LedoCool1 I think what makes an immersive sim has to do with systems within the game that interact with the setting in a way that makes sense within the setting. Inputs of these systems being multifunctional. Like in breath of the wild consider the uses of fire. Or in bioshock with the whole throwing lightning.
The biggest issue with the narrative and by proxy the meta-narrative is what it turns the franchise into; like Skynet and Judgement Day being an eventuality in the Terminator franchise, it turns the events of the Infinite and the previous two games from being an adventure into being a chore you have no say in that needs to be completed.
constants and variables moment
Very interesting video, as someone who always took the ending literally this made me rethink my opinion on the game a little. Although I still dislike infinite, I’m glad for this new perspective.
After replaying Bioshock two I have realized this would have been great time to talk about Lamb's word near the end of the game
I wish the Songbird didn’t die . That was too much . :(
Great video! There's one problem though: Only BioShock and BioShock Infinite can exist in the same game universe, because one of the constants that Elizabeth mentions is that there's always a lighthouse.
always amuses me that whenever any story development brings up infinite choices/universes/whatevers at how incredibly narrow minded they make the subject
That seems like a natural consequence of the medium. Every choice, every outcome, every consequence has to be thought of and created first. In this sense video games are little more than extremely sophisticated Choose Your Own Adventure books.
Not sure if you watched the film, Arrival. It's not perfect, but I think it beautifully illustrates the concept of understanding time, free will, and how one will still embrace all of it. The short story that the film is based on is more in depth, so I suggest reading and watching them both
in the end credit scene there is a calendar that says the date is October 8th 1893, the exact date when Anna was taken from booker so it could just be a flash back, it doesn't mean the he is still alive, although i'm sure that plenty of bookers did survive. I guess it's just open to interpretation.
I personally believe that the whole “unlimited possibilities” timelines is a near impossible plot point to nail in video gaming, as the player base’s imagination will ultimately always be able to find a flaw in the story. But I guess that imperfection is another beautiful addition
I know its late but bear with me:
even though its done in reverse, the far cry games (2-5, specifically 3 and 4) seem to operate super similarly in terms of format.
Some seemingly normal person comes to a foreign land through the "lighthouse" to complete a seemingly simple goal (Jason clubbing and skydiving to the Rook islands to vacation, Ajay taking a bus to Kyrat)
and are thrown into a world of violence and bossed around (Jason forced to kill his way through the island and bossed around, Ajay forced to fight with the rebel army to avoid being executed, the mercenary plunging into the civil war),
slowly delving into the insanity of the land and succumbing to same vices as the locals did long ago (enjoying the violence and drug fueled benders in 3, killing solely diamonds and guns in 2),
queuing the hidden connection you have with the setting (Jason being the destined warrior of the land, the Jackal following you all along before the game even began, Ajay being the almost step-son of Pagan MIn, Joseph foreseeing your arrival),
and finally the betrayal of the person you followed for so long (Jason killing Citra/friends, Ajay killing Min and one of the militia leaders, The mercenary betraying the armies and dying with the jackal).
Its interesting how it follows the same beats but in a different order at times and can still work quite well.
I like it how you probably put more thought into this than the actual developers.
The cut content from bioshock infinite was enough to make 6 more games. Tehy thought a lot about but constraints appeared.
in my interpretation, the booker from de post credits scene is a booker that never even got to the baptism. I think that the point of killing booker in the baptism is killing all the universes that came from that choice. the constant was that booker did something in the baptism, the variable is what he did. if he did died in the baptism, then he never choose to leave or to go with it, therefore all the Comstock and Booker (that we play with) die as well. so that leaves us with the bookers that never got to make that choice, and could live with their family.
Hmm... This makes sense, I used to tell people I don't play video games anymore, since I had already played Bioshock Infinite
I always took the post-credit sequence to be that one Booker who didn't mess up.
He never sold his daughter.
i think to erase history is to erase time itself.
If you wanted to get rid of Booker having that child all together, you would make sure that his parents never met, maybe even their parents parents. killing him after his birth for example wouldnt work because there could be a alternative timeline already where he got born somewhere else and still go the same direction as the other Booker. you would have to go back far and basically change history on a big scale and even THEN you cant be sure that Booker has Elizabeth.
gotta admit tho, i never played Infinite lol
I think I finally understand the ending. The post credit scene never made sense for me but I think I get it now
This man is slept on for sure
The Simpsons Videogame is the best version of this self-aware take.
I have this idea that ours is not only Booker that gets drowned. When we are approached by the other Elizabeths, none of then are our Elizabeth - I'll call her Elizabeth Prime -. Of the seven Elizabeths, at least 6 must know Booker, and we do see two alternate versions of him and Elizabeth in the Sea of Doors. This could mean that at least 6 other Bookers were drowned.
Maybe these Bookers, the ones who survived Columbia, were drowned simultaneously to better ensure Comstock would cease to exist. But one wasn't, which could be why there is still a reality where Comstock tried to take Anna away.
I see these patterns/formulas in movies too. I make a game of predicting them. The farther from my predictions that games and movies get, the more replay value they have
Have you watched DarK
No. Is it in English?
The issue is Booker doesn't really potentially become Comstock until the Battle at Wounded Knee. So they wouldn't even had to drown him, just find some way to prevent him from taking part in the battle.
There may be other battles that he has participated in though. We know that his actions are his kneejerk and that other battles can set him off down the same path.
@@InvaderTak176 That would heavily contradict the standard that the narrative is trying to establish though. Not to mention that its wildly contrived. There are certain constants that are present throughout each timeline, and one of, if not the most prominent ones is Booker fighting at Wounded Knee.
And even if he were to potentially become Comstock due to other battles, all Elizabeth would have to do is just sabotage Booker to get him discharged from the army.
Everyone thinks incorporating multi-verse into writing is so clever, but in all honesty its just incredibly lazy. You experience the whole game through (primarily) one specific time line, only to later learn that there are infinite time lines. Which makes you wonder why you should even care about what's happening in the one your currently experiencing?
@@spencercoles1800 I would say no partially to your reply (not on a narrative level, I agree with that, just simply on a technical established rule level) because you can technically even go farther back than that even and get Booker's mother to not concieve booker thus negating Booker and Comstock altogether, same with Elizabeth.
There are an infinite amount of universes with Booker as it would be without Booker; the universes we focus on however are the specific universes that do follow a close enough timeline for Elizabeth to interviene and have powers with.
At the end of infinite, we show only a handful of Elizabeths, so I am assuming that that is only the handful of universes where either Elizabeth cares, does something against Comstock, or has powers.
Ps I think that is why Rick and Morty has become pppular since it does make fun of mutiverse tropes.
As someone who has no idea about metal gear? games, the sentence "liquid snake trying to prove that he's better than his brother, solid snake" was absolutely bonkers!
Amazing video, but isn’t the term ‘Resonance Cascade’ so fucking amazing
Maybe the Bookers who would have chosen tails were also the ones that never chose to sell his girl and try to bring her back. And the ones that choose heads were the ones with the personality to have brought him to that point?
There's a third choice in these choices in infinite.
You can let the timer run out.
This all reminds me of the Half Life 2 conundrum following the end of the Combine and bringing order to the universe (Gman's faction). With Gman and his benefactors being the only other powerful beings in the universe as a threat to the combine, Humanity would inevitably take the combine's spot. Gordon Freeman, demonstrating that he is an extraordinary agent of the Gman, would end up being a threat to Gman's benefactors. The paradox of free will vs oppressive order comes through the form of whether Gordan and humanity should be put in their place, just as they did with the Combine (but with Gman's faction) or doom the universe by creating a vacuum of the power that the combine and Gman have once taken, creating a chaotic universe with never ending constants, creating a reason for an oppresive regime in the first place?
Liquid's goal was not to prove he's better than Solid. His goal was to realize the vision of Big Boss. He believed he was the rightful successor to Big Boss and his legacy. Therefor the strive for the reimplementation of the Nuclear Deterrent.
This sound at the end.... make me chills
I see it more as the only one responsible for our actions is . . . us. Booker choosing to let himself be drowned is him accepting that responsibility, because whatever he does to shun that responsibility leads to hurt for both him and everyone he knows. Only once he accepts just what he has done can there be a chance for him to make another, better choice in life.
Sayng that there is no reason to continue the System Shock formula is of little consequence, almost insulting, and would be quite arrogant. It's likely enough that every story that shall be imagined by people in our lifetime has already been told by someone before, potentially by someone well forgotten. Maybe it was overlooked because it came before we were ready to listen. Maybe it was overlooked because of quality of execution. This is why Prey had to be made, because you're listening, and to refine the execution, and this is why another *Shock will be made, to refine the execution again. The arrogant bit would be to suggest that the topic is exhausted and that no quality improvement can be made. In fact Bioshock Infinite feels remarkably stale and bad in gameplay compared to prior games. Maybe they were just tired. Maybe it doesn't mean anything.
So you have to conclude, either the statement that the creators want to bury the Shock formula speaks of their exceptional arrogance, or maybe you're overanalysing and no such meaning was intended.
The quality of execution is often the defining factor in a piece of entertainment. Illusionism, stage magic - watch it. Watch Lance Burton do his doves and candles routine. Do you think it's only magical because you don"t know how he does it, so it seems impossible? You have it on video frame by frame. You have a logical brain. You know EXACTLY how every of his moves must work if you just spend a few seconds. And yet, it's no less fascinating. Just because you know how he does it, doesn"t bring you a step closer to being able to do it yourself, and if you learn diligently for years and approach the level of mastery, your respect can only grow. In ballet, there is no surprise, you know the moves. In theatre, in opera, you know every word. And the connoisseur will watch again. You replay these games the 8th time now, and they haven't changed in the interim. At all. But the quality of execution is sufficient to satisfy you and inspire you again.
I didn’t understand this video at all (probably because I’ve never played bioshock) but I still loved it and watched all of it!
can you calculate the will of others and yourself, or are your thoughts truly random and thus not even yours?
that’s how i see free will.
Great video, very interesting points you brought up. Did you take into account that the beta version of Infinite was completely a different game ?. A lot of content was cut out or change from what we got in vanilla. still very good video, i enjoy your content.
The free will paradox has indeed happened when Bioshock self appointed as the spiritual successor of System Shock 2.
I assumed that after the death of pre batism booker was killed for no reason because of the end cutscene where booker walks in annas room, where i though he was gonna sell her again.
It fascinates me that this game came out the same year as The Last of Us, which had a controversial ending due to a lack of player choice. That game says "it doesn't matter what the player would do, this is what Joel would do" and then this game is saying "here are choices, but none of them actually affect anything"
I really wonder if the same kind of argument could be developed regarding From Software games. There are so many structural and thematic parallels between them that it's really tempting to try and understanding them as somehow being part of the same "multi-verse" (i.e. not the same world but the same set of possible worlds according to an almost axiomatic set of ideas)
It gets real fucking macro when you realize that all games, books, movies, storylines are all apart of the single universe we all live in.
@@topheftyr533 Sure and then you realize that even our lives are inter-mingled with these 'fictions' etc etc haha
Dude... I beat the game twice, still don’t fully understand it. But it’s still one of my favorite games up there with rdr2 and resident evil 4
Interesting take on the game's story and ending!
The meta-narrative in the Leadhead-universe says that the author might've gotten too stuck with authors wanting to kill their creations idea. "The System Shock-formula" can't be strected that far either imo, I really wouldn't consider Half-Life part of that lineage instead placing it in the progenitors of the linear tactical fps.
The luteces never brainwashed you, I just played it recently and the say that by pulling you across dimensions that your mind fills in the gaps themselves they didn't do anything to the players memories.
Thumbnail art is amazing
These kinds of videos are becoming my guilty pleasure and I love it
Possibly...there’s timelines where Booker never went to the baptism. So, no choice to ever become Comstock. That version continued forwards.
How this guy got 86K subs and marking vids of this quality? That's just criminal
I'm fully aware of multiverse theory and everything, but someone answer me this. Say the beginning of Infinite is the Prime universe, the main one, where DeWitt sells Anna to Comstock and the Lutece's, and is sent to bring her back to wipe away the debt.
We see the tear open up and everything to see the sequence to confirm that he did sell Anna/Elizabeth.
How did Columbia form in the same prime universe as the one Booker is in without there being transportation through different universes?
I think its because the "circle" as the games calls it, starts not when booker sells her, but when he has to choose if he gets baptized or not.. so if he does, he transforms into Comstock, and if not, he is the Booker that sells Anna...
@@Defer94 So this does prove that TIME IS NOT MADE OUT OF LINES... IT IS MADE OUT OF CIRCLES from Red vs Blue
The truth of free will... I can't give you a definitive truth. But, I can tell you a possibility that may be true. Choosing left or right, regardless, you as Booker have a destination. One. Heads or tails, is a good show of character if you eliminate most of the other variables that may influence a different choice. I mean, he must have seen the score board but chooses heads anyway. As in, it didn't matter to him, he was giving what he wanted to pick. To feel like your fate is set in stone, is because your own character has no desire for change, or may not change even if you want to. You are who you are, a future based on that. If you don't change, then why would your future? Comstock compared to martyred Booker may seem very different, but both are part of who Booker is. He had both of them in him, it just shows what would be if he felt more guilty and craved the a real chance to make amends (which is something already within our Booker) while the other is the side that embraces his horrible thoughts. Booker always chose heads because the version of him who sold his kid was also the version of him who chose head. He choices led him there, bit the shallow choices that can go either way or gets him to where he needs to go. If he had chosen tails for some crazy reason, like, he had a friend that always chose tails and was seen as a something lucky that kept him alive for whatever reason. If all that was the case and influence, then it would take a whole lot more timelines to find such order if events. And in the timeline, would that even be Booker? And, would he even be in the situation where he would get the chance to pick?
Man...I really gotta replay these games there sooooo good
I think the literal ending for Infinite isn't that every Booker AND Comstock is dying, just the Comstocks. The priest offers the Baptism, and he doesn't say 'no,' he dies while under water. But Booker, in the timelines that he doesn't become Comstock, says 'no.' I think Booker dying in the Baptismal waters is meant to be the multi-dimensional/multi-timeline stand-in for every Booker turned Comstock, eliminating every Elizabeth and saving every Anna. That's why the central one doesn't disappear (she's not ""our"" Elizabeth, she's got no pendant), and how the baby in the crib could still be in the crib.
11:26 You just explained Father Pucci
So did Comstock exist if Booker refused the baptism, or the opposite?
They belong to different realities, where one did something the other did not
They should of stuck with 2 timelines. That would have solved a lot of problems. Why show us all possible worlds which are actually near clones of each other? Also why would A daughter want to kill their father? Isn’t that suicide? It is interesting how we play the game game outside our own timeline. It’s also interesting how Elizs pinky being in another world gives her powers, although that’s also kinda crazy. BTW the Luteces are the same person, female in one world male in another.
Elizabeth(1) drowned Booker(1). all the potential Bookers and Comstocks that Booker(1) could have been ceased to be possible. That doesn't mean that ALL possible Bookers and Comstocks ceased though, after all, hypothetically, Elizabeth(2) couldn't bring herself to kill Booker(2) one universe over, leaving Booker(2) to choose baptism or refusal. and Elizabeth(3) tried to drown Booker(3) but he didn't wanna drown, and so chose to fight back, and escaped. so when a Booker sacrifices himself for Elizabeth, he and his future selves cease to exist, but his alternate selves aren't effected.
Hope that makes as much sense to you guys as it makes sense to me at 1 in the morning :P
He doesn’t row.
Would like to see Bioshock team take their own advice and make a non-System Shock-esque game, in addition to dissecting such things.
If there’s a timeline where the Elizabeth’s did go back and kill booker there would also be a timeline where they didn’t so maybe they killed half the bookers
You're destined to choose.