MovieChat Forums > BioShock Infinite (2013) Discussion > SPOILERS The choices you make in game

SPOILERS The choices you make in game


SPOILERS

SPOILERS

SPOILERS


Is anybody pi$$ed off that the choices were irrelevant?
Loved the game and can't wait to replay but is anyone at all peeved that the whole bird/cage stuff was pointless,
Don't ask me to make a choice and for it to have no pay-off....grr!!

I get the point that they were making 'no matter what choices you make your life is fixed at certain points' etc

And don't say 'all part of the experience' the ending is totally feasible without fake choices

Just feels like they were being mean or patronizing




"Somebody oughta teach you some manners Vernon"

"Well it ain't gonna be you prag"



reply

"It's a feature - not a bug" .. ;)


Seriously though: This whole aspect of the game comes off as rather pointless and undeveloped. Like something that was meant to be a feature but was abandoned during production and left in "as is".

I know the game explains it away by making the whole futility-of-choice-thing the central point of the story. Choice is irrelevant since we're dealing with a multiverse where every possible choice (and combination/chain of choices) happen(s) ... somewhere.

While that may all be fine from a story-telling POV, personally it disappointed me quite a bit. We're talking about a game here, not a movie. Being able to influence the narrative or the game-world is one of the major attractions of any computer-game IMO. Lack of said influence doesn't automatically make a game bad in my book, and having it in a game doesn't automatically make it good. I for one didn't care all that much for the way the original Bioshock handled choice (harvesting/saving little sisters). Didn't seem like an integral part but more like it was thrown in as an afterthought - which, AFAIK, it was.

But "Infinite" takes a different route: It kind of teases you with the early choice moments (throwing the baseball, choice of pendant), so you *expect* there'll be a point to these. But in the end the game more of less says: "Hah! Thought you could influence the game-world or even the story? Well, think again!" Almost as if the game was trolling us.. ;)




S.

reply

That's exactly what I meant :) it does seem underdeveloped and I think Ken Levine might have been butthurt by the little sisters criticisim so it came off as petty rather than clever.

reply

I think I've posted this somewhere else before, but I think you could argue that it is *somewhat* clever as a comment on the "illusion of choice" in games.


No matter how much choice we're presented, everything that can happen in a game does so because someone (writer/programmer) came up with it and implemented it into the game. Which is to say that the player can have as many choices/ways to influence the story/world as he likes, but in the end, everything was pre-planned by someone else anyway and the final result is pre-determined. Doesn't matter if it's one single possible outcome (as in Infinite) or several different outcomes (as in the original Bioshock).

But to me, this line of reasoning feels more like a pretty fancy way of excusing a story that runs on rails. But I guess it'd be a valid point nonetheless. As soon as you're dealing with a narrative dreamt up by somebody else, you don't really get any choices - other than the ones created by the author.


S.

reply

It didn't really bother me that much I didn't expect anything and to be honest wouldn't have wanted something profound from a choice of a pendant. I was more let down by how hyped Elizabeth was, when she seemed not so much.

reply

To be honest, the static ending doesn't bother me that much.

What DOES bother me, is that your chosen actions don't sway the opinions of 'The best video game sidekick EVARRR' towards you one single iota.

reply

What's interesting is that besides the fact that the player can choose which pendant Elizabeth wears, the bird and cage both symbolize imprisonment. The cage is self-explanatory, but the bird is actually quite the opposite of what it appears to be. The bird represents Songbird, whose main purpose is too keep Elizabeth in captivity. So no matter what you choose or do, Elizabeth will be captured by Songbird at some point, and will be placed back into her "cage" while being brainwashed and tortured.

The game only gives us the illusion of choice, but in reality, it all goes back to the whole constants and variables thing. You can choose the bird or cage, but just because you chose one over the other doesn't mean you're going to receive a different result, for they both symbolize and yield the same outcome.

Personally, I liked this aspect of the game; however, I can definitely understand why this might bother some. Plus, I like how these little moments foreshadow certain events in a subtle way.

My movie review channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/drumking1006?feature=mhee

reply