Fan-Made BioShock Infinite Pendants Offer Bird or Cage

Fan-Made BioShock Infinite Pendants Offer Bird or Cage

image

Unlike Elizabeth, you can have both of these necklaces inspired by BioShock Infinite.

Bird or cage? This is a choice Elizabeth makes shortly after you find her in BioShock Infinite. Technically, the choice of which pendant to wear is up to the player, and now it's up to you, thanks to a crafty Etsy user. Etsy shop owner Annie Saunders, also known as leagueofshadows, is now taking pre-orders for these bronze bird and cage pendants. Make your choice, or buy them both, so you'll always have one that suits your mood.

The listing describes each piece as "a beautiful bronze filigree setting hung from a delicate 18" bronze chain, secured with a lobster clasp closure, with an image of a bird or a cage (your choice)." They're also available with a brooch backing. The owner notes that these pendants are great for cosplaying, but what I like about them is that they can be worn with a variety of outfits and not look totally out of place. Most of my geeky attire is limited in where I can wear it; my Tartarus t-shirt wouldn't be appropriate in a business casual environment, and my Portal earrings wouldn't really go with a dress for a fancy event. These, however, I think I could get away with.

The pendants are listed at $15 each, which seems reasonable, and will be available in three or four weeks. If you're in the market for some BioShock Infinite jewelry but these just aren't your style, there are some other related items in leagueofshadows' shop.

Source: Etsy via Kotaku

Permalink

I really like this. I'm curious actually, does it make any difference whatsoever which pendant you choose in the game? Or whether you choose heads or tails for that matter?

VanQ:
I really like this. I'm curious actually, does it make any difference whatsoever which pendant you choose in the game? Or whether you choose heads or tails for that matter?

The lockets look nice, would have preferred a fully functional mechanized songbird though.

"FUCK YOU TRAFFIC!!! WEEEEEEEE" Never ending stooooooorryyyyyy, ahahaaa

VanQ:
I really like this. I'm curious actually, does it make any difference whatsoever which pendant you choose in the game? Or whether you choose heads or tails for that matter?

Besides a few lines of dialogue, it doesn't change anything in the slightest. It's one of Infinite's little flaws that in my opinion, while unfortunate, doesn't do much to make the experience say...inferior to the first game. Still, it's pretty cool that these now exist...I might just pick one up for the sake of hoping to pick up a conversation about the game while in public. xD

Next I want a songbird plushie, one that looks exactly like they do in the game.

Please somebody make this.

Seems like the perfect couple's gift.

Pfft, screw that noise. I want one of those Zeppelins.
image

Bah. Pendants. I'd buy one, but I don't think they'd look nice on a male. :I Maybe I could get one for my sister.

I can get behind one of those Shock Jockey rings, though.

I started watching Portlandia recently so all I have to say about this is "Put a bird on it!".

I like them but I usually like to buy things that are easily recognizable by other gamers but discreet at the same time. For example, I have an AC logo pendant. Anyone who sees it immediately knows its from AC but it's not like the pendant actually reads "OMG ITS ASSASSIN'S CREED! WHEEEEE!". In fact, to other people, it's just a random pendant. But with this one, I doubt even a hardcore Bioshock fan would recognize its origin or would make the connection immediately.

But like I said, they're still awesome.

And this is why I love Etsy.

1337mokro:

VanQ:
I really like this. I'm curious actually, does it make any difference whatsoever which pendant you choose in the game? Or whether you choose heads or tails for that matter?

The lockets look nice, would have preferred a fully functional mechanized songbird though.

"FUCK YOU TRAFFIC!!! WEEEEEEEE" Never ending stooooooorryyyyyy, ahahaaa

Well, I guess somebody missed the whole "constants and variables" thing that was repeated about a dozen times over the course of the game.

That, and the ending, which

and there's the thing where...

I could see how a person might miss that theme,

but interpreting it as the exact opposite?

(The Moral choices in Bioshock 1 were shoehorned anyway)

$15? Sold. I love the bird. I don't think it'll look good on me, cause I'm a guy, but I'm getting one for the girlfriend. Phase 1 of "Re-create video game character that I am totally in love with" complete.. muhahahaha...

if they had made one with both patterns, one on each side, you could spin it and it'd look like the bird was IN THE CAGE

image

weirdguy:
if they had made one with both patterns, one on each side, you could spin it and it'd look like the bird was IN THE CAGE

image

Thanks, that's what I thought of immediately as well upon seeing this. Now, I haven't played Bioshock Infinite yet, but I have to assume those necklaces are a reference to that optical illusion spinny thing. Why it's non-functional (either just in the jewelry or in the game, too), I wouldn't know, but it seems like a missed opportunity.

I didn't think there was someone who enjoyed pseudo-philosophy that badly that they would swallow anything without much thought. Not to mention that yes moral choices are always shit because game developers can never incorporate something as complex as a moral system properly into a game. Are you good or evil? A dichotomy once more.

First let me say that I do not wish to engage in a long debate about Bioshock Infinite, I will have my say about it, you will then probably answer it and then we will basically be done. I already finished the game and moved on.

The person I answered asked a question about player choices and I gave him a 100% accurate answer about the player choices in Bioshock Infinite. No matter your interpretation of the story it doesn't change the fact that my answer about the player choices was 100% correct.

Now allow me to explain why it is a bunch of pseudo philosophical bullshit. Oh and prepare yourself this is allot of reading.

In Bioshock 1 objectivism is threaded through the entire narrative and story mechanic. It is explored and thought about. The player is asked to form an opinion about characters who both embody the ideal of the same philosophy but are at odds with each other.

Here it is a bunch of bullshit slapped onto the ending of a game that has thoughtless critics and fanboys creaming their pants over what is essentially something that stoner guy in any 70's comedy would say. Bioshock Infinite in the end is just a new skin draped over Bioshocks bones. The Constants and Variables? That's basically the game telling you it's design philosophy :D

You take the same elements and just switch them up a bit.

Plasmids = Vigors
Water = Sky
Lighthouse = Lighthouse

Whatever else actually new in ways of gameplay that they add they just have no fucking idea what to do with. The Songbird is proof enough of that with the way that guy is wasted.

1337mokro:

Thnak you for phrasing that for me, don't mind if I quote a few lines do you ? It is for a friend.

Also the necklaces look quite nice, wouldn't have minded getting one as a memento had the game not been what it is.

Ph33onix:

1337mokro:

Thnak you for phrasing that for me, don't mind if I quote a few lines do you ? It is for a friend.

Also the necklaces look quite nice, wouldn't have minded getting one as a memento had the game not been what it is.

I loved Bioshock Infinite, but I have my own reasons for why I -heavily- disliked the ending. They are highly subjective and emotional in nature, however, but it basically revolves around the tone of the ending reveal. I thought it was crass and cruel.

Nope go ahead. Anything you put on the internet basically becomes public domain instantly :D

Wow, those are actually really pretty. I wonder if you could make one that has one image on each side to reflect the style of Elizabeth's power from the game? That'd be cool.

1337mokro:
*snip*

You seem to have very strong convictions toward this, so I'm not going to have an extended argument with you, although I will leave you with my point of view;

I feel as though I just read about half a dozen paragraphs misinterpreting BSI to follow the real-life many worlds interpretation, instead of its own well-established, internally consistent system of infinites with less variation than the many world interpretation.

Variables and constants also aren't sweeping rules for all characters, gender for example. It is a constant for some, but not others.

And lastly I think it important to note that universe of BSI treats all iterations of a person as the SAME person with one overriding mind that is intrinsically linked to all its own variations.

are NOT individuals. That is one of the reasons why choice is such an important theme to the game.

All of its conflict arises from poor choice or underestimating personal importance, and the ramifications thereof. Only when a certain character takes full responsibility for their life

and their guilt, when stronger choices are made, can anything be resolved.

In my view, the necklaces, though they provide no real consequence, are there to convey to the player and establish that choice *does* make a difference in BSI's universe, because they Lutece is always surprised by the choice you make. I believe the writers included this scene specifically to convey that message; reality is mutable by personal choices.

[/spoiler]

Innegativeion:

1337mokro:
*snip*

You seem to have very strong convictions toward this, so I'm not going to have an extended argument with you, although I will leave you with my point of view;

I feel as though I just read about half a dozen paragraphs misinterpreting BSI to follow the real-life many worlds interpretation, instead of its own well-established, internally consistent system of infinites with less variation than the many world interpretation.

Variables and constants also aren't sweeping rules for all characters, gender for example. It is a constant for some, but not others.

And lastly I think it important to note that universe of BSI treats all iterations of a person as the SAME person with one overriding mind that is intrinsically linked to all its own variations.

are NOT individuals. That is one of the reasons why choice is such an important theme to the game.

All of its conflict arises from poor choice or underestimating personal importance, and the ramifications thereof. Only when a certain character takes full responsibility for their life

and their guilt, when stronger choices are made, can anything be resolved.

In my view, the necklaces, though they provide no real consequence, are there to convey to the player and establish that choice *does* make a difference in BSI's universe, because they Lutece is always surprised by the choice you make. I believe the writers included this scene specifically to convey that message; reality is mutable by personal choices.

[/spoiler]

I now have to respond to this. Because really this is what I am talking about. Speculation and the pretense of being coherent with itself. The ideology in BSI is not consistent, it is sloppy writing that pretends to be high brow. For example let's take your wording for BSI's multiverse.

I cannot comprehend how you can write sentences like this: "---- instead of its own well-established, internally consistent system of infinites with less variation than the many world interpretation."

A consistent system of INFINITIES (not infinites, infinite is an adj), with LESS VARIATION. As opposed to what. Other INFINITIES? An infinity is an non measurable unit. Something that has no less or more. There is no more or less variety because as we know the choice is the deciding factor therefore the amount of choices are the method by which the variation is decided. Seeing as the choices are infinite in their number and branching therefore the variation are also infinite. They cannot be or more or less when the determining factor is an infinity.

The only difference here is that BSI claims certain set values. These set values do not change the variability around those values which is still an infinite number.

If the Luteces are ALWAYS surprised then your choice has NO CONSEQUENCE because the end result is ALWAYS surprise. The same with all your other player choices. They have no consequence because they do not influence the story, they do not even influence the way your AI partner treats you. She will say the same things every time. In fact the AI partner will sometimes hilariously find money right after a giant emotional scene shattering her consistency as a character.

Now you are of course allowed to enjoy this game and think it is really smart and good and all the jolly things in the world. But don't pretend like there exist no holes or inconsistencies in their pop-science version of alternate realities.

I now have to respond to this. Because really this is what I am talking about. Speculation and the pretense of being coherent with itself. The ideology in BSI is not consistent, it is sloppy writing that pretends to be high brow. For example let's take your wording for BSI's multiverse.

I cannot comprehend how you can write sentences like this: "---- instead of its own well-established, internally consistent system of infinites with less variation than the many world interpretation."

A CONSISTENT SYSTEM of INFINITIES (not infinites, infinite is an adj), with LESS VARIATION. As opposed to what. Other INFINITIES? How is an UNKNOWN, which is what an INFINITY is, an unknown quantity, or immeasurable and therefore unknown, consistent? You see it is UNKNOWN. Therefore you cannot make any prediction or guess of it's consistency not even with itself. To arrange a SYSTEM of INFINITIES is to make a group of interrelated, interacting or interdependent UNKNOWNS.

An infinity is, as stated earlier, a non measurable unit. Something that has no less or more. There is no more or less variety because as we know the choice is the deciding factor therefore the amount of choices are the method by which the variation is decided. Seeing as the choices are infinite in their number and branching therefore the variation are also infinite. They cannot be or more or less when the determining factor is an infinity.

The only difference here is that BSI claims certain set values. These set values do not change the variability around those values which is still an infinite number.

If the Luteces are ALWAYS surprised then your choice has NO CONSEQUENCE because the end result is ALWAYS surprise. The same with all your other player choices. They have no consequence because they do not influence the story, they do not even influence the way your AI partner treats you. She will say the same things every time and act the same way towards you at plot critical intervals.

Now you are of course allowed to enjoy this game and think it is really smart and good and all the jolly things in the world. I to enjoyed the game though I came to the conclusion that it was the poor man's Bioshock with pilfered gameplay with failed new ideas that were not exploited to their best potential or which BREAK the game. See Skyrail and Handyman, the two mortal enemies.

However don't pretend like there exist no plot holes or inconsistencies in their pop-science version of alternate realities. It is after all written by a writer, a person concerned with characters, plot and theme. Not with creating scientific model propositions for parallel dimension universes.

Also all this talk has given me the urge to go re-watch Sliders. Should be fun to rewatch some good old 90's TV.

1337mokro:

A CONSISTENT SYSTEM of INFINITIES (not infinites, infinite is an adj), with LESS VARIATION. As opposed to what. Other INFINITIES?

Yes, exactly. It's kind of fundamental to calculus.

It's like this; (works this way in several real multiverse interpretations too)

Universes work on probability, so even though there are infinite versions of a universe, some things are so unlikely to happen that it would take longer than the heat death of the universe for them to actually occur.

Like someone randomly teleporting from earth to the moon. There probably isn't a universe like that.

In BSI's multiverse, probabilities are just such to allow fewer variations.
------

The reason the game always plays out the same way is because it is a game. I'm sorry if you're upset with that, but I bought BSI expecting a video game.

So your argument is that an improbability, does not happen because of the fact that it is an improbability somehow gives an infinite amount of possibilities, of which the probability of each possibility is an absolute unknown, a certain order of probability in which they might happen and therefore there is a finite amount of universes, because the probability for all the possibilities to occur in a single universe before it ends would be 0.

The first step here is to even calculate the probabilities and what is an acceptable probability. Which is impossible because both of those and the amount of universes is unknown. So good luck doing that. I would also like to know how you came to the conclusion that a man being teleported to the moon is so improbable that it will never happen in the next few billion years. You see you don't know how often the event is simulated, or how many times the same event is simulated at the same time.

For example let's take the BSI coin flip as a probability experiment.

If I flip a coin and it lands on it's side 0.0562% of the time. Then the speed and the amount of coins I can flip simultaneously affect the time between one landing on it's side. You see each coin has the exact same probability, so flipping 100 coins at the same time is essentially similar to flipping one coin a hundred times. Which again highlights how absurd it is to say that a probability will be guaranteed to take a long time. You see it is a probability. It might happen at the first try or at the millionth try, each try has an equal probability and therefore no actual reliable or even predictable time constraint.

You then go on to completely ignore the fact that every possible combination of every possibility already exists in a separate universe, meaning that time is completely irrelevant because we are not working with just one universe, but an infinite amount of universes containing an infinite amount of combination of possibilities. So yeah... it doesn't matter how long it would take to happen by chance in a universe, it will still happen if the probability is not 0 because every possibility will lead to a separate universe where it exists.

In this equation time is not a factor. The only factor that matters is if there is probability so whilst I am going to commit a horrible faux pas by claiming a percentage of an infinite, if there is a 0.000000000003223232 chance of someone randomly being sucked into a wormhole and appearing on the moon then 0.0000000000003223232% of the infinite amount of universes will have this event happen in them. See what you made me do? You made me calculate a percentage of an infinity. My math teacher would strangle me if he ever found out about this crime against math.

Can you please just for once. Read back to yourself what you just wrote, before you post it. Please?

Can you also explain how teleporting to the fucking moon is a choice? You see the deciding factor for the branching universes is not actually probability it is the branching of choices. So probability in BSI has no bearing on the amount of universes. The amount of branching choices is the dictating factor. Each choice has an equal probability. So probability even if it governed anything in BSI would be utterly pointless because pA always equals pB.

Also I started to notice something. You see that? Look at what your hand is doing. That motion you are making with your hand? That is called handwaving. You don't get to handwave critique about the game away with "It's just a videogame" you see I like to think that videogames are better than that. I like to belief that they are capable of more than being childrens entertainment or frat boy pass times. If Ken Levine wanted to create something to play without thinking about it he would not waste time creating and I quote "a compelling narrative, believable companions and a memorable experience".

You don't get to handwave critique when you at the same time claim a videogame has a brilliant story. You see my complaint is that they wanted to explore a theme, then did nothing to incorporate that in the gameplay. Other games manage to do that. For example Alpha Protocol, which as a theme also had choice and actually changes dialogue, events and story based on your actions. Alpha Protocol is a shitty game. I will say that despite the fact I love that game to death. A shitty game did a better job at exploring it's theme and incorporating that into gameplay than Bioshock Infinite which I consider to be a good game. You don't get to say that games cannot change based upon your actions when there exist games that change upon your choices about dilemma's in the game's narrative.

I like to believe the creators of BSI are also above saying "Dude, it's like a videogame, don't expect to much of it!".

I bought a game. I played a game. The game presented me with a narrative and it's own ideas. The game then asked me to think about them and that is what I did. Something I suspect you neglected before singing praise about the game's brilliance.

EDIT:

A fun probability experiment to see exactly why what you said about probability is incorrect.

Get a bunch of dice. 6 is what I usually use because the chance is 1/6 for each side.

Now take 1 dice and put it in a bowl. Throw that dice as many times as it takes to get a 5. Now repeat that experiment. There is a chance that each time you need the exact same throws to get a 5 but it is more likely that you will need varying amounts of rolls (time) to get a 5.

Now repeat that with 6 dice at once. Put em in a bowl and throw em. Count how many times before you get a 5. Most likely because you just performed 6 dice throws in one instance the amount of throws is less than with just one dice. However again because it is a probability that a dice will land on 5 it could also take LONGER than with one dice, again meaning you cannot ever predict when a probability takes place unless it is exactly 0, which means it will just never happen.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here