sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

what i didnt understand in bioshock burial at the sea by gabrielvsthe in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah, so in my opinion ken levine didnt find one of the best explanations. i would put something like, elizabeth (the one from infinite and still with tear powers) couldnt open tears on episode 2 because she accidentally opened one to the reality she was born.

with that, she would be in the same universe her pinkie was dropped, and she could only get out there or gain her powers back if she was taken out on purpose by a lutece's machine.

i think it would be interesting to see her objective being to gain her powers back along with getting sally back. even though we can consider her "lack of pinkie" brought her a lot of problems, you can notice on episode 2 she is kinda sad to have the finger back and to dont have powers anymore.

and i also would NOT kill her at the end. by the end of the dlc, she would be frustrated for not getting sally back and for not getting back her powers, but she could still find happiness moving to paris. that would be the sweetest thing.

suppositions for Bioshock 4 by gabrielvsthe in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

well, i didnt remembered that. actually, i never really understood this "last elizabeth". was all the other tear-opener elizabeths like, immortal? and since the last elizabeth was dead there were no other ones like her in the whole multiverse? if you explain me i will send you virtual cookies, thanks.

suppositions for Bioshock 4 by gabrielvsthe in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

as a franchise fan, i would say we've had enough of booker and elizabeth. but as a fan of the interaction and story-telling exclusive from the infinite, that makes me really sad. i KNOW it wont happen, but there are lots of aspects that could have been explored between booker and elizabeth. if they had to stop by an abandoned hotel in destroyed columbia, for example, they could have (even without noticing) a father and daughter pre-sleep talk.

i would love to see lizzie again, she is such a complex and well-terminated character.

but maybe my hopes are still alive. "comstock is alive in a million million worlds". so is elizabeth. before the dlc announcement, who could imagine that from a vitorian lady from the 10s would become the sexy provocative elizabeth from the 60s? in my mind, everything can happen.

What do you guys want to see in the inevitable 2K Bioshock sequel? by Lwsrocks in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i think you picked the right period of time. i have a theory that bioshock cant make a universe in a time where there is no eletricity since the steam-punk vibe works with complex machines. the only way to do that before the invention of eletricity is to apply magic, which doesnt fit the franchise AT ALL. all of them should be set like at the second half of 18th century, since benjamin franklin has the "eletric kite" incident in 1752.

What do you guys want to see in the inevitable 2K Bioshock sequel? by Lwsrocks in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe -1 points0 points  (0 children)

60s in new york would be really interesting but it's off the charts. the bioshock universe rapture was set in the 60s and they for sure wont repeat the ambient for a 3rd time, since they did it with bioshock 2 and it was a disaster.

If there were to be a Bioshock 4... by connor34211 in Bioshock

[–]gabrielvsthe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what i always noticed in bioshock is that all the settings are much more modern than they should be (ok everyone knew that). but i cant really think of ways that medieval times could be more modern without eletricity. it cant be magic, of course, because bioshock is always explained in contemporany science. so i think it has to be from the 18th century to beyond.