Random Thoughts – Randocity!

Bioshock Infinite: Or, why circular time paradoxes suck!

Posted in movies, storytelling, video game, video game design by commorancy on June 3, 2013

Note: If you haven’t yet played Bioshock Infinite yet, this article contains spoilers.  You should stop reading now! You have been warned.

Many people are awed and dumbfounded (even Wikipedia) by the story within Bioshock Infinite. Wikipedia is supposed to remain neutral, yet the article for Bioshock Infinite is extremely biased towards Infinite containing a ‘great’ story. It most definitely isn’t ‘great’ by any stretch. For some odd reason, gamers (and critics) think what’s in Infinite is a good thing and somehow even like and see it as some sort of thought provoking experience. Well, perhaps it is in some small way thought provoking, but not thought provoking in the right (or even a good) way. Let’s explore why Bioshock Infinite’s type of thought provoking experience is not a good thing and not something to be wanted or desired in storytelling.

Breaking the Rules

There’s something to be said for people who break the rules. Sometimes breaking the rules can lead to good consequences. Most times, it ends up in failure. Story and narrative creation rules have been in existence since the earliest fiction book was written. Yet, these rules have minimally changed throughout the years to keep stories satisfying and fresh. The rules for well written storytelling are already firmly established. Granted, the storyteller can take liberties if the diversion leads you back to something profound within the story. Basically, the idea behind storytelling is to keep the pace and momentum going and to flesh out characters who the reader can feel good about. Plot devices are used to keep the story on track, to know where that story is heading and what the end goal is for the characters. With the ultimate goal being to produce characters whose situations seem real and profound.  The characters are the crux that ground the story even if the rest of the world is fanciful. Without this grounding, the story falls apart. With that said, every story has a beginning, a middle and an end. All three of these should be clearly defined so that what transpires along the way leads to a satisfying conclusion of the characters lives where the readers have invested their time.

Video Game Storytelling

With video games, the way to tell a story hasn’t substantially changed and not every video game company ‘gets’ it. Every entertainment experience today should become a cohesive character driven story to be successful. Within video games, there are two pieces to the story puzzle. The gameplay and the storytelling. Both are symbiotic relationships. One feeds off of the other. Neither should really become dominant in this mix. If the game falls too much into a storytelling role, it loses the interactivity needed to be a great video game. If the gameplay is all there is and the story only happens at the beginning and end, the story becomes an afterthought. Both have to work together to create the whole and to keep the player engaged in the game and the story. However, should one become more dominant than the other, the gameplay should win. It is a game after all.

Time Travel and Storytelling

Unfortunately, too many novice storytellers decide to use the extremely overused, trite and cliché device known as time travel via time anomalies to create and tell their (ahem) story. Worse, without clearly reasoned ideas, time travel can easily make a story become a Deus Ex Machina blunder. As it’s far too easily done wrong, time travel should be avoided in most stories as it really has no place in any quality storytelling experience. And, it’s usually not needed. For example, J.J. Abrams uses this device within the newest Star Trek film reboot. He, unfortunately, uses it to create an alternative universe where the original Star Trek crew don’t actually live. Instead, he creates a rebooted universe of his own choosing and design. His storytelling approach is to toss out the baby with the bathwater and start over on his own terms. Not only does this completely dismiss and insult Gene Roddenberry’s vision of Star Trek, it completely smacks of pretentiousness. J.J. Abrams apparently thinks he’s better than Gene Roddenberry and can somehow improve upon what Roddenberry has created. In fact, there is no need for this in the Star Trek universe. The original Star Trek universe works perfectly fine as it is for setting J.J. Abrams’ story.

In J.J. Abrams’ Trek, the only true Star Trek original crew was the aging Spock who somehow accidentally stumbled through a time hole into J.J. Abrams’ fabricated new time paradoxical Star Trek universe. After you realize this, you’ll understand just how horrible the new Star Trek film really is. The events that took place in J.J. Abrams’ Trek movie don’t exist in the universe that Gene Roddenberry created. This also means that you’ve wasted 2 hours of your life watching a contrived useless film.

Bioshock Infinite is a video game who’s designers decided to use time travel and alternative dimensions (string theory) to explain the story. The only thing the writers successfully accomplish is to produce an incomprehensible mess of a story with characters we ultimately don’t really care about. Some players saw the story as thought provoking. The only thing that Infinite accomplishes, if you begin to think on the story, is unravel its own story and you’re left with questions like, “Did it really even happen?” or “Is he alive or dead?” or “Is the story really over?”. Questions that, if you really want satisfying closure to a story as a writer, you don’t want people asking. These are not the kinds of questions that should be left over at the end of your story. These are the kinds of questions that lead people to critique the story as being trite, cliché and poorly written. You want people to value and cherish and like the story. You want them liking and asking questions about the characters, what happened to them after, where the story might go from here. You don’t want to leave your story open to ‘Infinite’ possibilities where the story leads effectively nowhere and there are so many of the same characters that you can’t even wrap your head around it. In storytelling, infinite choice is the same as no choice. Meaning, if there is no way to tell what happened, that’s the same as saying that it didn’t happen. Which then means that playing the game is pointless.

Time Travel and Time Paradoxes

Time travel is a concept that we do not know if it’s possible. It’s all theory and conjecture at this point. It could become a reality in the future, but we’re not there yet. Telling fanciful stories about time travel and multiple universes may seem like something good, but most times isn’t. The single biggest problem with using time travel and string theory in storytelling is the circular time paradox. That is, a situation that would lead the viewer to logically conclude just how the story came to exist if changing a small piece caused the creation (or unraveling) of the situation in the first place. As a concrete example, in the film Terminator 2, Skynet effectively creates itself. That is, a Skynet robot from the future is sent back in time to kill the then kid, John Connor. Yet, it fails and is destroyed. Its robotic brain technology chip is recovered by Cyberdyne Systems. Cyberdyne Systems employees then reverse engineers the chip which, through technology breakthroughs as a result of that chip, then causes the conception of the technology that leads to the birth of those exact robots and the Skynet computer. Effectively, the technology creates itself. Because of this circular time paradox, this makes stories like Terminator 2 unwieldy, unsatisfying and poorly written. Technology simply cannot create itself and stories should never be written that even hint at that. Humans should always have a hand in that creation of something or the logic of the whole story falls apart.

Likewise, Bioshock Infinite creates a time paradox where the death of Booker unravels the game’s entire reason to exist. Why would you, as a writer, intentionally negate the reason for your story’s existence? Basically, you’ve just told your readers, this story sucked and it didn’t really happen. Or in the case of a video game, the designers are saying, “Yes, we understand you’ve invested hours and hours playing this video game, but really, the story and game just didn’t happen.”

Bioshock Infinite

Oh, this game seems like it tries to keep itself on track in the beginning, but fails because its writers and the story simply get more and more lost with every new time hole (tear) that Elizabeth creates. The writers eventually can’t keep up with the time paradoxes and begin ignoring them entirely in hopes that the player will too. Unfortunately, I can’t overlook this issue. It’s one of my pet peeves within stories. While I don’t plan on keeping score of exactly how many time paradoxes take place over the course of the game, the one that matters is at the very end of the game.

If Booker and Comstock are one and the same person, and Booker kills himself as a child, Columbia can’t come to exist and neither can Elizabeth. Of course, what happens is that multiple Elizabeths drown Booker in a mock baptism which also negates the entire Comstock Columbia story. Which means, Booker would never come to visit Columbia and Elizabeth would never have been stuck in the tower. Who’s to say Anna/Elizabeth would have even been born? Yet, self-preservation and survival is the strongest human instinct that humans have. Why would Elizabeth knowingly do away with her own existence by killing her own father or even allow that to happen? That’s just not logical or rational from a character self-preservation perspective. Worse, because Irrational’s designers postulate the possibility of ‘Infinite’ realities with infinite Elizabeths, Comstocks, and Bookers, there never could be complete destruction of any one of those characters or of every infinite possible version of that story. Even worse, thinking thorough the possibility of infinite stories, how do we even know that the story we played is even the one that matters in the Grand Scheme? Likely there is a universe where Booker doesn’t become Comstock and Elizabeth and Booker have a normal happy family relationship and live happily ever after along with her mother.

Ultimately, what does any of the Infinite story have to do with Rapture? Yes, we got to see Rapture through one of Elizabeth’s doors, but the only relationship between Bioshock Infinite and the other Bioshock games is strictly in that short visit to Rapture. Nothing in this multiverse story has anything whatever to do with explaining the existence of Rapture (other than being just another alternative reality). It doesn’t explain splicers, big daddies, little sisters, big sisters or anything else that transpires on Rapture. In other words, the writers of Infinite fail in two ways:

  • They fail to give us a story in Infinite that ultimately makes any sense in the end
  • They fail to explain the creation of Rapture or of those people who end up on Rapture

They even fail at explaining how Columbia comes to exist. If the multiple Elizabeths are successful at drowning Booker, Comstock can’t come to exist and neither can Columbia. That means that the entire story in Bioshock Infinite doesn’t even happen. Which, unfortunately, leads to a circular time paradox. Such circular time paradoxes should always be avoided when writing time travel and string theory stories. Why? Because they leave the viewer with the question, “What was the point in that?” and provide a less than satisfying ending. It’s also not the question you want your viewers left asking after it’s all over. You want them to be thinking about the story and how they like the characters along the way. If the characters are all completely toss-worthy, as in Infinite, then it’s all pointless. You don’t want the viewer fixated on how the story even came to exist because that then turns the viewers to realize just how bad the story is and how worthless the characters are. Further, as an author, why would you ever intentionally write your entire story and characters out of existence via a time paradox? Is your story really that unimportant to you and your readers?

It’s the same reason you never write a story that ends up with the main character waking up from a dream at the end. Stories that end up as one big dream sequence are completely unsatisfying.  Viewers think, “Why did I waste my time watching that?” It’s definitely the wrong thing to pull from a story. Time travel stories with circular time paradoxes are just as equally unsatisfying for the same reason as waking up from a dream sequence. In fact, these two plot devices are born from the same mold and should never be used unless there is a very good reason to break that rule. This is especially true if primary storyline’s time paradox negates the whole reason to even tell the story because the characters never existed. So far, I’ve not read one recent book, seen a recent movie or played a recent game that had a story that could successfully navigate time travel or multiverses as plot device.

The closest any recent filmmakers have ever come to making time travel actually work without producing circular time paradoxes is Robert Zemeckis’ Back to the Future series and Alfonso Cuaron’s adaptation of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban with its Time Turner sequences. Both stories are carefully crafted to avoid circular time paradoxes. In Prisoner of Azkaban, the Time Turner sequence isn’t used as the main story driving device. Instead, it is used in a noble way to save Buckbeak from death, which allows the film to have a very satisfying closure despite the inclusion of time travel. Zemeckis’ Back to the Future films do use time travel as the main plot device. However, these films’ stories are also very carefully crafted to avoid time paradoxes and leave each film with very satisfying conclusions. So, you ultimately care about the characters and ignore the silly time travel plot device. I would also include that the original H.G. Wells’ Time Machine movie is probably the most successful story at navigating time travel as a device within the story without creating a circular time paradox, while still providing engaging likeable characters along the way and a satisfying conclusion.

Overused plot devices

Time travel use as a plot device, while extremely popular, is mostly carelessly used. It has been used in such popular franchises as Lost, Stargate, Star Trek (series and movies), Terminator and is now being used in video games like Bioshock Infinite. Writers need to be extremely judicious with their use of this plot device. Time travel should only be used in a way that advances the story forward, but never in a way that becomes the story itself (as in Bioshock Infinite). Unfortunately, Irrational’s writers just don’t understand how to properly use this plot device within the story context and they use it incorrectly. It should never be used in the way it is used in Infinite. Instead, Columbia could have been shown to exist for other reasons than because of infinite realities.

At the end of Bioshock Infinite, it’s quite clear that the time travel piece is poorly conceived. It ends up making the main character appear as if he is having a psychotic episode rather than actively part of multiple dimensions and realities. I full well expected to see Booker wake up in a mental facility (on Rapture) with nurse Elizabeth administering sedatives to him. At least that storyline would have dismissed the time paradoxes as unreal events and showed us that Booker is just a mental patient among many. This is what is needed to ground the story and tie in the Bioshock Rapture story experience to the Bioshock Infinite story experience full-circle. Yes, that ending would have invalidated Columbia as a non-event, but the writers already did a good job of that in Infinite. Yes, I realize I’m advocating explaining off Infinite as a dream sequence (which is generally to be avoided). Because the Infinite writers already negated their own story, that mental hospital ending would at least start to explain how Rapture came to exist in the state it is in when we played the original Bioshock which is still a far better ending than negating your entire story. At this point, the Infinite story is just a jumbled disarray of ideas that didn’t congeal and that basically made the entire Columbia story a complete time wasting experience.  We don’t care about Comstock and now we don’t know what to think about Booker. Anna/Elizabeth ends up simply being a facilitating plot device, but we really don’t feel for her plight at all during or after the story.  At the end, she ends up a pawn (as is everyone else including Booker and Comstock). In fact, because of the time paradox story negation, we really don’t care about any of the characters.

As an FYI to future writers, ending your story with infinite universe possibilities and infinite versions of your story’s main characters is the worst possible ending for a story if you want your characters to be remembered. Because you as an author should value your story’s existence above all else, negating your characters and story with a time paradox simply sucks. If you don’t value your story, why should we?

9 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Randy Allen Parsons said, on May 29, 2015 at 12:58 pm

    The biggest rule they broke making the game was not mentioned here. Do not mix multiverse theory with single timeline. They forced the ending into a single timeline which was mixed with multiple Elizabeths. Why would the other, slightly different looking (?) Elizabeths care about that one particular universe in which that one particular Dewitt is getting a baptism? The devs tried to make you thing all the universes are now one so that your death matters. They seem to have a thing for you character dying at the end, as in Bioshock 2s ending. The problem is who cares? Its just one universe, why would the Team Elizabeth get together for just that one universe? Do they run around to hundreds of thousands of universes wiping out Comstocks? Why the hell would all the universes have lighthouses? Would Eliz, who is really the central character, be better off going all Doctor Who and just find a nice little universe, maybe where people are green, and settle down in Paris?


    • commorancy said, on May 30, 2015 at 3:39 am

      Hi Randy,

      Thanks for your comment. I can explain why there were a number of Elizabeths all there drowning Booker or visiting Lighthouses or even visiting Rapture. It’s not that any one Elizabeth cares about the others, though some will, some won’t. It’s more the fact that there would be multiple timelines with Elizabeths all drowning Booker. Though, there would be at least as many not drowning Booker. In fact, there would be many timelines where Elizabeth was not confined to the tower. There would be many timelines where Elizabeth was not dragged through the time hole and lost her finger. Indeed, there would even be timelines where Booker, his wife and Elizabeth lived happily ever after never having lived this story (which also means there would be no Comstock or Rapture). If the writers are going to drag us through a story in infinite multiverses, then the story should be about all possible realities. Instead, the writers kept trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to drag us back onto a single timeline that seemed ‘the most relevant’. In fact, that all failed, but this game is also likely the reason why Irrational Game Studio disbanded after the release of this turd of a story.


    • commorancy said, on May 31, 2015 at 4:39 pm

      I would also like to add the following…

      In reality, the biggest problem with this game was the infinite multiverse idea. The word ‘Infinite’ is even in the title of the game. If you’re a game story writer contemplating the use of infinite multiverses, you must create a game mechanic that allows the player to explore any multiverse they choose and then allow the player to choose the outcome that makes the most sense to the player. Instead, the Irrational artificially constrained us to one single universe in the infinite multiverses as if the one we were ‘stuck to’ was the one that mattered… and then limited us to a single forced ending. An ending that really didn’t make a whole lot of sense.

      Ultimately, the reason this game was a fairly spectacular failure storywise goes back to the development freedom that Ken Levine and Irrational games had when producing this game. Irrational was clearly given the freedom from 2K games to produce whatever they wanted. Because Ken Levine is a revisionist and perfectionist, this game would continually undergo story changes, possibly even daily at Ken’s whim. This left the lead game developers with a quandary. They either had to go against Ken and do the right thing or succumb to his whims and humor him. It seems that in the 3-4 or so years of development in which this game floundered, the story, ideas and game became a casualty of Ken’s continual revisionism.

      Worse, the studio was so worried about the little details that they forgot all about one crucial element, the combat system. For many of the early years of development of this game, there was no combat system. I believe they had the rails working, but not the combat. Once they hired the right people to get this project back on track, only then did they introduce a combat system. Unfortunately, the combat system they introduced was, at best, a rushed together hack job. In fact, it was so out of step for the game’s story that it felt like the odd-man-out.

      On top of the fact that the combat system was an afterthought introduced rapidly and haphazardly, the infinite multiverse ideas were trimmed, revised, changed and revised again. This left Bioshock Infinite a mess of a story and a mess of a game. It seems that Ken Levine blamed the entire outcome on the fact that there were too many cooks in the kitchen (er.. too many engineers at Irrational Games). He felt the company was just too big to function properly. While some of that may be true, it also seems that Mr. Levin wants complete control over every aspect of his game. Instead, it seems that this game suffered from the fact that there were too many people and too many ideas combined with continual changing ideas and lack of direction from the game producer. Ultimately, the game is okay. It plays okay. It has some redeeming qualities, but not many. The game is definitely not of the quality I would expect from an A-Title game company. This is the kind of title I might expect to see from Atlus or Naughty Dog or even Konami. But, this is definitely not the quality I would have expected to see from the company that produced Bioshock 1 and 2.

      Instead, Irrational should have focused on Bioshock 3… the continuing story of Rapture. They should have scrapped this infinite multiverse idea right off the bat and gone back to what they had understood best, production of another straight-up Bioshock. Because Irrational games shut down almost immediately following the release of Bioshock Infinite, we’ll never get to see a proper end to the Rapture trilogy. The whole reason why Bioshock Infinite ended up the way it did is the same reason why Irrational Games ended up closing its doors.


  2. Asashii said, on October 28, 2013 at 8:19 am

    all Dewitts who wanted the baptism, were drowned by elizabeth, so they would not become Comstock, those that denied the baptism were spared and stayed dewitt, the ending after credit scene shows this. wasnt that hard to follow or really figure out. Some people blaming the game because they have low comprehension, just need to stick to hack and slash and click the button games and leave the 10th grade education or highier games to the adults!


    • commorancy said, on October 29, 2013 at 12:34 am

      You clearly only realized the ending at the game designer’s face value, but you didn’t take it one step further to rationalize the bigger story picture. What you failed to realize in your hypothesis is that the only timeline that mattered to the player was the one we played. All else was a complete distraction. If the Dewitt from the player’s storyline drowned, and it certainly appears that he did, then the game we played couldn’t even come to exist. No Dewitt, no future Comstock, no Columbia. No future Comstock, no Elizabeth locked in a tower, no baby stolen, indeed, probably no baby at all. If this Comstock is also the same Comstock that set up Rapture, then no Rapture and no Bioshock 1 or Bioshock 2. Effectively, the whole universe that we knew as Bioshock was completely reset as a result of the time paradox and never even came to exist.

      It doesn’t matter how many other Dewitts, Comstocks and Elizabeths there were. Those timelines were only ghosts and don’t ultimately matter. According to the game writers, what we played was the ‘real’ timeline. However, if you conclude that the timeline we played didn’t, in fact, matter… then the game was entirely pointless and so was Bioshock 1 and 2.

      You have to follow this rationale through to full conclusion to realize just how piss poor the story quality is. I won’t get into just how high of a high school education you need to follow the rationale through to this conclusion that I just put forth.


  3. Admiral Cactus said, on October 26, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    I completely agree with you! Nice to see someone finally expressing how it really is!

    The dreadful realization that the stars in the sky in the ending of Infinite actually was lighthouses, was profoundly horrible. Not only was the story of Bioshock Infinite negated by itself, but it also meant that the story of Bioshock 1 and 2 really was nothing special. The universe I had come to care so much about turned out to be just one in an infinite number of different ones. “Constants and variables”, what a ludicrous plot-device.

    Letting Booker wake up in a mental ward in Rapture would have been ten times as satisfying as the current ending for Infinite. Maybe the writers even could have made Booker’s story show how a splicer perceives Rapture? At least then they would have written off the whole time travel-multiverse nonsense as exactly what it was, nonsense!

    The new DLC’s coming out called “Burial At Sea” seemingly continue to defile this once great gaming-universe.
    Stop mixing Rapture and timetravel, multiverse bullshit!


    • commorancy said, on October 26, 2013 at 5:13 pm

      Hi Admiral Cactus,

      Thanks for your comment. Considering the experimentation on people that Comstock had been performing on Rapture (i.e., Splicers and Little sisters) based on all of the bloodied lab rooms, it would make perfect sense to have Booker wake up in a Rapture mental ward in some semi-psychotic state.. being shaken out of it. That would have made a lot more sense than Bioshock Infinite. Yes, you are correct, the writers just threw out the baby with the bathwater. In one poorly devised story, they completely threw away not only Bioshock Infinite’s story and characters, but the entire Bioshock franchise itself.

      Based on Rapture merely being ‘just one lighthouse’, Rapture may not have even been a story that even mattered in the multiverse. We just happened to be thrown into that one because that’s where we ended up. Wrapping my head around how little value was placed on Rapture is just so incredibly trite, I’m done with this series.

      The writers can backtrack their way out of it, but why bother at this point? They would have to ‘Ex Deus Machina’ and engineer out the entire Bioshock Infinite story to actually move forward with any semblance of a new story. For the same reason that you never write omnipotent characters into stories, you don’t write infinite realities into stories either.

      Basically, Irrational games unintentionally undescores yet another plot don’t in storytelling. Let’s recap storytelling plot don’ts.

      Trite storytelling plot devices you should NEVER EVER use:

      1) Never resolve your story as being a dream sequence in someone’s mind
      2) Never use amnesia to conveniently ‘forget’ important plot information
      3) Never use omnipotent characters
      4) Never introduce a character at the story end for the sole purpose of wrapping up your story
      5) Never make everyone conveniently forget that anything happened (see #2)
      6) Never use a circular time paradox so a story actually creates itself
      7) Never use string theory to create new timelines specifically to negate already established timelines
      8) Never use time paradoxes to explain away or negate your entire story, characters or the universe
      9) Never use ‘magic’ to resolve your story (see #3)
      10) Never use your story as an obvious mouthpiece for preaching some personal ethics or moral dilemma
      11) (Solely for Irrational Games) Never use infinite realities to tell your story

      Stories need to stand on their own in a timeless way. When a storyteller uses any of the above lazy plot devices, it means they do not have a grasp on how to write a real compelling story. It means they are intentionally looking for cliché and trite devices to conveniently resolve internal story conflicts. It means the writer just doesn’t have the creative skills necessary to really work through the problem.

      Thanks to Irrational Games, they broke at least 3 of the above rules in Bioshock Infinite. I won’t get into how many lazy gaming devices Irrational also used (i.e., locking you into defeating a boss before you can continue the game). Suffice it to say, while the game looked beautiful, that’s where it all ended. The story was about as lame as it comes and the gaming devices were just so lazily designed, they probably just ripped them from other games instead of actually writing something new. This game is definitely my last investment into this franchise. It may also be the last Irrational game that I buy if this is the best experience they can offer.


  4. Neo said, on June 19, 2013 at 10:36 pm

    Nicely put. I stopped playing the game ever since Elizabeth opened 2nd tear and said “there’s no coming back to this world”. The story should’ve just ended right there.
    Game play sucks and is dull anyway.


    • commorancy said, on October 26, 2013 at 5:26 pm

      Hi Neo,

      Agreed. The game is as dull as the day is long. The only reason I believe that some people actually liked it is because, while it was dull, if you tried to think through the silly time dimensional issues, it made your head hurt. Unfortunately, it made your head hurt in all the wrong ways. It’s fun when a game makes you think to get through a level (use strategy or the correct weapons or use the tools they’ve given you in a clever way), but it’s never fun when you’re trying to understand the story that really makes no sense to begin with when the gameplay itself is just old and boring.


Comments are encouraged under these rules: 1. No personal attacks allowed. 2. Comments with personal attacks will not be posted. 3. Please keep your words civil. Thank you for contributing!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: