seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Russia

seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Mexico

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Chile
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Canada
why wouldn't elizabeth just have shot bookerstock point blank in his office. why did she have to go on this quest to psychologically torture him via child abuse, destroying any shred of sympathy I could have for the character. Girl he was right there passed out, and no one cares about a corpse in Rapture just take him out.
Even Burial at Sea's base concept is annoying- Elizabeth didn't need to kill Bookerstock because there was NO way he was going survive the civil war. Like all people in Rapture he was just a dead man walking and she could've just peaced out knowing he would die. (but of course this would require her level of omniscience to be an actual skill she could use and not just plot convenience to force the story around)
Elizabeth: "A sky-hook?"
Booker: "Sky-hook? You mean the "Air-grabber"?"
Elizabeth: "Huh, constants and variables"
Me:
@goopi-e its during the Elizabeth and Bookerstock dance for Cohen, snuggled up right next to implicating Cohen in human trafficking little girls to pedophiles
They really just let him torture Suchong for 15 hours with no repercussions when Suchong was so powerful and influential in the city he would've gotten pay back himself- and Ryan should've been mad about his most valuable scientist getting tortured when Suchong had a ton of dirt on him- but nope, nothing happens of it. Bookerstock just got to torture our only korean character with no punishment.
Sometimes I think about how BaS treats our only named Korean character.
I saw this idea shared on a two years old Infinite critique video at 3am like Saturday night and now i KEEP seeing it to the point where someone said it on my own video and i NEVER EVEN THOUGHT OF THIS BEFORE-
AND LIKE???? COULDN'T SHE??? What was stopping her from sticking her hand through the tear and then turning the machine off?? They game puts emphasis on her pinky being back, and makes it feel like being in two dimensions at once it what gives Elizabeth her powers so if she chopped herself into two dimensions again wouldn't she get some form of them back??? and then she could drop a bowling ball on Atlas' head, take Sally and leave- or if she's ACTUALLY feeling remorseful she could pop up where ever Tenenbaum was and offer her abilities to use tears to get girls out of the city.
I COULD see some bogus excuse where having "returned to a dimension she died in" somehow invalidated her existence, and would prevent her from actually getting her abilities back- but, like I said, that's BOGUS and would be to force the story around- because the phrasing of the Luteces talking about "returning to how they were both" make its sound much more fluid and flexible than "nope its OVER now"- or something something it wouldn't work because Columbia doesn't exist any more, so leaving a part of her in a dimension that's going to be erased wouldn't bring her powers back- i don't KNOW this game makes a point of never defining Elizabeth's powers so they can be abused as plot convenience and not a tool for her to use.
this is the same comment- and a sentiment I've seen shared multiple times- but I don't think it really changes anything in the context of BaS- Because Elizabeth's reason to hunt down Bookerstock wasn't because "you killed baby Anna" but because she was traumatized by experiencing Baby Anna's death herself when she super imposed or w/e and she wanted to put Bookerstock through that- to make him pay, and bringing Baby Anna back through a vita chamber wouldn't undo that pain.
Im going to roast bookers nuts over an open flame he only became a good character after he died in BaS2 and it basically cancelled itself out cause of how ass BaS is.
You know I've had multiple people share the sentiment of "Booker got better after he died in BaS2" which I never really got? I mean Bookerstock died in part 1, and the only 'Booker' we deal with after that point Elizabeth's hallucination Booker- which is just her subconscious patting her on her back.
I ASSUME people found Bookerstock's plight in the first part of BaS somewhat sympathetic, despite his negligence, coupled with how unlikable Elizabeth's tactics were at getting revenge (using a 5 year old as bait and burning her alive to psychologically torture your enemy is. Hm.)
Still though it felt like Bookerstock was TRYING to grow as a person (i mean he did abandoned his power and authority, eventually taking in a child so she'd have a food and shelter). He didn't do, a GREAT job at it, and his memory loss stopped him from really owning up to what he did- but with how Infinite set up constants and variables, and both game's lack of interests in exploring the characters, Bookerstock was always just going to be treated as a Comstock and killed because that's what has to happen to Comstocks. They're irredeemably evil by Infinite's logic.