[QUOTE=Niklas;40095867]I pre ordered Bioshock Infinite in the last hour before release, and didn't even notice i now have bioshock and XCOM enemy unknown too :suicide:[/QUOTE]
but that's good?
[QUOTE=bearwolf;40096005]Did anyone seem to have 20+ lock picks about 3/4ths of the way through, but no locks to really use them on?
But at the start I was scrambling to even find 5 lock picks and had to back track on myself to reach the nearest safe/lock.[/QUOTE]
Yeah at the end of the game they seemed to almost "rush" the level design in that things such as keys for safes, lockpicks and codebooks became completely forgotten about, and just in case you didn't have enough lockpick for the few doors they had in the end they put them everywhere. Like, codebooks were only used 3-4 times through the whole game most of which before the halfway point and the only time I ran into optional objectives with finding keys for a safe (that actually involved a fair bit of backtracking and fighting through new enemies) was right at the begninning.
At least the gunplay/gameplay itself in the latter part of the game was still fun and the storyline actually ended good, unlike the first bioshock where the latter part of the game had a semi-dumb ending, as well as weaker gameplay and weaker design.
The game is flawed in that sense, in that a lot of the level design concepts were just abandoned in the latter half of the game but at least the combat and arena encounters were pretty good all the way till the end. Still though, would have been better IMO if they made that whole finding-keys thing along with having lockpicks actually be rare important finds to getting into secret areas a key part of the level design all the way till the end.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;40095243]Did they every explain the vigors in the game, they explained plasmids in bioshock but I don't remember any explanation of vigors in this one[/QUOTE]
[sp]Fink developed the vigors after seeing plasmids being used in Rapture through a tear. It's in a voxaphone recording somewhere in the factory. Also in case no one noticed, when I was playing through and heard about Albert Fink (the dude that presented his version of "God only knows" with the quartet dudes) there's a voxaphone in the place where he died (don't remember exactly where now, somewhere in the factory) and on it he explains that he got the inspiration for "his" music from the future and that he reworked songs like God only knows to fit his style and then put them out as his own. At one point there, you come across a record that is produced by "Rapture Records".[/sp]
[QUOTE=mopman999;40095919][sp]but they all dissapear after a note is played in the song and after it goes to black we hear another note.[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]I think the significance of not showing her fading away, although the music notes suggest she does, is to imply that she does fade away, but not quite in the same way that the other Elizabeths do. The other ones are from the Comstock universe, and they would be gone completely, the one that we know gets to live on (kinda) in the new timeline we see after the credits.
Usually at this point I would say "I'm thinking into this way too much" but I think it's all done purposefully. If we can come up with all these ideas speculations in our spare time just days after playing the game, then surely the people that created the game over years thought about this too.
Or maybe it's just dramatic effect, in which case hey, it's still fun to speculate about.[/sp]
Also I would have liked it if more skyline combat was used
I'd really like it in future DLC if they just went crazy with skylines like some of the trailers imply, by making huge arenas with multiple skyline branches and a bunch of stuff going on. Instead the skylines were only present in about 40-50% of the combat encounters, and out of that percent only half of the skylines involved more than just being one looping track around an arena.
Going on my second playthrough now. This one will leave no stone unturned. So far I've found a bunch of things I missed the first time. My first playthrough I didn't find a single [sp]vox cypher[/sp].
[QUOTE=Wyvers;40096105][sp]I think the significance of not showing her fading away, although the music notes suggest she does, is to imply that she does fade away, but not quite in the same way that the other Elizabeths do. The other ones are from the Comstock universe, and they would be gone completely, the one that we know gets to live on (kinda) in the new timeline we see after the credits.
Usually at this point I would say "I'm thinking into this way too much" but I think it's all done purposefully. If we can come up with all these ideas speculations in our spare time just days after playing the game, then surely the people that created the game over years thought about this too.
Or maybe it's just dramatic effect, in which case hey, it's still fun to speculate about.[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]The reason why we don't see the Elizabeth disappear is because right when she vanishes that time line ends. It doesn't exist, you're dead and it never happened[/sp]
[QUOTE=KorJax;40096122]Also I would have liked it if more skyline combat was used
I'd really like it in future DLC if they just went crazy with skylines like some of the trailers imply, by making huge arenas with multiple skyline branches and a bunch of stuff going on. Instead the skylines were only present in about 40-50% of the combat encounters, and out of that percent only half of the skylines involved more than just being one looping track around an arena.[/QUOTE]
Like I had mentioned before, I think it would have been incredible to [sp]fight Songbird across a long series of sky-lines broken up with small platforms and the like with supplies.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Aperture fan;40096273]Like I had mentioned before, I think it would have been incredible to [sp]fight Songbird across a long series of sky-lines broken up with small platforms and the like with supplies.[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]honestly i doubt we'd be able to kill it anyway. look what it did to the tower.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096303][sp]honestly i doubt we'd be able to kill it anyway. look what it did to the tower.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Well they did say that [sp]in every universe where Booker tried to get Elizabeth back after songbird recaptured her he failed and songbird killed him.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096303][sp]honestly i doubt we'd be able to kill it anyway. look what it did to the tower.[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]I don't really think outright killing it would have been necessary. I picture blasting away at its eyes and maybe its wings to ground it, then when it's finally grounded and thrashing about on the streets blind, you and Elizabeth would land from the rails to confront it. She would talk to it and calm it down, then use some tear-y magic to kill it.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Greeneyes;40096372]Well they did say that [sp]in every universe where Booker tried to get Elizabeth back after songbird recaptured her he failed and songbird killed him.[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]If 137 Bookers couldn't kill him, I'm going to just suggest he wouldn't be killable.[/sp]
137 might not be the right number but my point stands
[QUOTE=Greeneyes;40096372]Well they did say that [sp]in every universe where Booker tried to get Elizabeth back after songbird recaptured her he failed and songbird killed him.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Where'd they say that?
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096403][sp]If 137 Bookers couldn't kill him, I'm going to just suggest he wouldn't be killable.[/sp]
137 might not be the right number but my point stands[/QUOTE]
123, actually, including the current one.
And I suppose you're right, but a man can dream.
Might be spoilers.
Also might be late.
[URL="http://image1.findagrave.com/photos/2010/316/177263_128970590432.jpg"]http://image1.findagrave.com/photos/2010/316/177263_128970590432.jpg[/URL]
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096403][sp]If 137 Bookers couldn't kill him, I'm going to just suggest he wouldn't be killable.[/sp]
137 might not be the right number but my point stands[/QUOTE]
There are also [sp]constants and variables in each timeline, so it could be that each Booker did not have the right supplies/luck with him.[/sp]
[QUOTE=DarkWolf2;40095823][sp]Which, with the help of Rosalinda Lutece, was able to float through quantum physics. Later on she found her alternate version of herself in a different universe through a tear, and Comstock ordered more experimenting. Eventually, they were able to engineer tears that were passable. However, Comstock's constant exposure (obtaining visions of the future, prophecy etc.) to the tears made him sterile, get cancer, and rapidly age.
Worried that he would not have any offspring to complete his "prophecy", he orders the Lutece twins to obtain an heir from a different timeline. In that timeline, Booker did not get babtised, got a child (Anne DeWitte), and drank/gambled his way into debt due to his guilt of what he has done at Wounded Knee. Robert Lutece made use of this by acting as an agent to make him sell his child to him in order to clear his debt. Afterwards, Robert gives Comstock the child and passes through into the Columbia timeline in the alleyway scene. However, over time, Robert saw the mistreatment of Elizabeth, and through a tear, the twins saw the future Comstock's upbringing of Elizabeth would create: The destruction of New York in 1984. These things made them decide to try and fix what they've done. They are found out by Comstock though.
Comstock, trying to hide the truth of Elizabeth's origins, ordered the death of his wife and the twins, the latter of which was orchestrated by Fink through "an accident". Assumed dead, they were actually able to exist in and out of time and space. Going wherever and whenever they wanted to go. Still not satisfied with how events are turning out, and afraid that their direct interference may make things much worse, they take Booker DeWitte into their own timeline to act as their agent, and order him to "Bring the child and wipe away the debt." Their bringing in of Booker creates conflicting memories and events within his memories, in which he forgets the alleyway encounter with Comstock and the tear, Anne's dissapearance and a bunch of other stuff, only leaving the prominent memory of "Clearing the debt", which he assumes is his gambling debt.
This is where the game takes off.[/sp]
Wrote this mainly so I can remember it myself, but also for BloodYScar to comprehend the ending.[/QUOTE]
Thank you! But:
[sp]If comstock stayed in his timeline, why is this madman raving about Comstock not having been in Wounded Knee,
if he in fact WAS - but still under the name Booker? Does he simply not know that Booker is Comstock?[/sp]
I still support the theory that [sp]songbird is booker[/sp]. makes perfect sense given the behavior
[editline]30th March 2013[/editline]
[sp]booker or lady comstock[/sp]
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096506]I still support the theory that [sp]songbird is booker[/sp]. makes perfect sense given the behavior
[editline]30th March 2013[/editline]
[sp]booker or lady comstock[/sp][/QUOTE]
Soon enough people will be saying [sp]booker is everyone[/sp]
[QUOTE=Zinayzen;40096506]I still support the theory that [sp]songbird is booker[/sp]. makes perfect sense given the behavior
[editline]30th March 2013[/editline]
[sp]booker or lady comstock[/sp][/QUOTE]
Dude what if [sp]Songbird is booker, and booker is songbird, except we are cursed in the tear so they both look different.[/sp]
[sp]Elizabeth is actually the female version of Booker[/sp]
[sp]booker is columbia
columbia is rapture
rapture is andrew ryan
andrew ryan is elizabeth
booker is elizabeth
elizabeth is tree[/sp]
[sp]So, if Booker is Comstock, then why doesn't Comstock have the "AD" branded on his hand? Shouldn't he have it too? Or did I miss something?[/sp]
[sp]Oh nevermind, right, in his timeline he didn't have a daughter...[/sp]
Also, you know an ending to a game is good, when you see pages after pages of spoiler-tags :v:
[sp]ken levine is booker[/sp]
Why can't I play as Elizabeth and have to be generic action protagonist dude or whatever?
(has not actually played the game, just seen two adverts)
[QUOTE=KorJax;40096576][sp]booker is columbia
columbia is rapture
rapture is andrew ryan
andrew ryan is elizabeth
booker is elizabeth
elizabeth is tree[/sp][/QUOTE]
If you would've said [sp]Elizabeth is tree[/sp] after [sp]Andrew Ryan is Elizabeth[/sp], then it would be implied that [sp]Booker is a tree[/sp]
[QUOTE=_Slick_;40096606][sp]So, if Booker is Comstock, then why doesn't Comstock have the "AD" branded on his hand? Shouldn't he have it too? Or did I miss something?[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp]Because AD stands for Anna DeWitt because he was depressed for selling his daughter, whereas his Comstock self never sold his daughter or had one at that.[/sp]
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;40096617]Why can't I play as Elizabeth and have to be generic action protagonist dude or whatever?
(has not actually played the game, just seen two adverts)[/QUOTE]
Because all Elizabeth does is run around, throw you stuff and open locks.
[QUOTE=Kirbyfactor;40096644]Because all Elizabeth does is run around, throw you stuff and open locks.[/QUOTE]
That is what would've made the game GOTY for every year.
[sp]What was the business with the AD on Booker's hand? That's the only thing I never understood.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Swebonny;40096557][sp]Elizabeth is actually the female version of Booker[/sp][/QUOTE]
[sp] No she really isnt [/sp]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
