"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" and all of that.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion
- Thread starter thomasmahler
- Start date
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" and all of that.
FlutterPuffs
Member
It happens in the real world too. Try and read on the shit that happened during the French Revolution.
I laughed when Elizabeth said that the revolution could have a happy ending like in Les' Miserables.
I disagree. The very fact that they chose to drown Booker at the baptism, rather than going back to Booker's birth and "smothering him in the crib", means that there are still other Bookers and other Annas in the multiverse, versions untouched by the tragic events of the game.
Yeah. This isn't literature... The writing team did a good job but they are still operating within the frame work of a big budget commercial video game in the year 2013. What they managed to squeeze from it is commendable, but sure there are plenty of things that don't quite mesh. They're painting in broad strokes.
Robert Lutece never hires Booker to free Liz from Columbia. This is a false memory that Booker makes up to make sense of his situation. He has the AD carved into his hand because every Booker DeWitt has Anna and every Booker DeWitt gives her away. When the twins brings him through the tear for the first time (right before the rowing scene) Comstock's memories mix in with Booker's memories. They start to overlap, delete each other, corrupt each other, etc. and Booker's mind tries to make sense of the situation by clinging to something he has been reliving everyday of his life for 20 years "Bring us the girl, wipe away the debt" The phrase is meant to be talking about him giving away Anna but his mind applies it to this situation as well to make sense of things.
I want to agree with you but this game puts unneeded restraints on the usual quantum theory idea. They say there are some constants and some variables and they heavily hint to the baptism scene being a constant. They may not have smothered Booker in his crib because he was still the Hero of Wounded Knee, he still did other important things in his life before the baptism occurs and they may not have wanted to erase those things from history.
dark_inferno
Member
Next Stop... A City on the moon in the 70s.
I mean Rolling Stones and "Moonpeople" said too much already.
I mean Rolling Stones and "Moonpeople" said too much already.
FlutterPuffs
Member
I disagree. The revolution seemed to be inspired by the French Revolution in all of its clusterfuckness.
I'm going to have to play through the game again, but I remember on one of those electro-scope? devices it mentions about the brother suddenly appearing/arriving, which could tie into your theory that the brother was from booker's timeline.
At one point, I thought Lady Comstock was Anna.
Booker after getting baptized became Comstock and made columbia.
and Made his daughter Anna, Lady Comstock. (why fuck own daughter? coz hes an evil daughterfucker)
and Killed Lady Comstock coz she knows that Eliz is a younger version of herself.
Damn, I am a sick human being for imagining all that. :l
Booker after getting baptized became Comstock and made columbia.
and Made his daughter Anna, Lady Comstock. (why fuck own daughter? coz hes an evil daughterfucker)
and Killed Lady Comstock coz she knows that Eliz is a younger version of herself.
Damn, I am a sick human being for imagining all that. :l
Nah, a dairy states that the sister pulled him into her timeline. They spoke a bit through some tears and then she decided they should be in the same timeline so she pulled him in.
Also, it seems silly to argue that he comes from the exact same reality as our Booker. By the end of the game, at the very least, we have already played as 3 different Bookers from 3 different realities and that doesn't even take into account the fact that most of us probably died a couple times while Liz wasn't around which just adds more to that number.
I'm a worse human being. Knowing all that I know, I still would have liked a sex scene in the game
The Luteces don't exactly hire Booker to free Elizabeth from Columbia, but they do want him to do that. When they pull Booker into the tear at the lighthouse, they hear him muttering about "bring us the girl, wipe away the debt". They take advantage of Booker's muddled mind by giving him props that support his false view of what's happening - the box full of instructions, for example.
To answer Raviolico's question, the Booker at the beginning of the game HAD a child who was taken away from him. But because he was just pulled into a different universe, he can't remember that very well.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Ya, I missed a lot, thanks for the explanation. I must say telling a complicated story via small audio recordings might not be the best idea. Maybe Ken thinks to highly of this media for story telling. Maybe more explicit flashback sequences might work better.
raviolico
Member
well, thanks.. ;-)
now i feel very dumb. every Booker has Anna? even the Comestock one? so the baptism was after Anna`s birth in whatever universe??
and the Lutece deal was just a mockup memory from Booker? so what exactly are the Intention of the Luteces??? revenge on Comstock? if they not hire him why they "guide" him? oh man..my little, simple brain....
Actually, if we want to be thorough, they want Columbia to never exist in the first place. I don't think they really know how that come come to fruition but they know Liz is the key. They just want Booker to get to Liz and start interactions with her and they start honing their plan more as they see what these interactions do.
raviolico
Member
ahhh.....it just clicked for me. thanks! ;-)
Sorry, when I said every Booker Dewitt has anna, I meant every version that doesn't become Comstock. I think of Comstock as a completely different person. Anna is born after the baptism no matter what. Basically, I am saying every reality where the baptism is declined, Anna will be born and then gven away.
The Lutece's goal is to make it so that Columbia never existed in the first place. Diaries allude to the fact that the male Lutece decided that this mucking about of realities and timelines was wrong and he offers his female self an ultimatum. Either we try to fix all this, or I leave. She agrees because being the sciency type, she loves hanging around with herself so their plan is to find a way to make it so Columbia didn't exist.
I think the diaries are a great way of story telling. They make it so that the story isn't intruding into gameplay every 3 seconds while still telling a story better than most other games. Bioshock is a game meant for exploring and if you don't do that then you deserve to be punished story wise. Just from general looking around, I found 76 out of 80 diaries my first time through and I never felt like I had to comb over every little detail to find them. There would always be one in an area that the game didn't want you to go to, simple.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
There is clear and explicit inspiration from the French Revolution; Elizabeth directly compares the sound of the crowd outside in the third Gunsmith dimension to Les Miserables.
In terms of American inspiration, the closest would probably be lynch law / justice which was common at the period of time the game takes place. We don't know which American presidents exist in the BI universe post-Lincoln so it's hard to say whether lynching remained normalized. The tide really turned in the US around 1905 when Teddy Roosevelt started using the bully pulpit of the presidency to oppose lynch justice (particularly after the Delaware lynching--before then, lynching was seen as a nasty remnant of the post-Reconstruction south, but seeing it in the heart of the union was shocking to many).
I suspect that Roosevelt would not have been president in the BI-verse. I mention it because I think the treatment of the Vox as anarchists doesn't explicitly reference McKinley's assassination (it was VERY easy to scapegoat anarchists after McKinley was shot)... hard to say. It may have been deliberately omitted to keep the allegory at some distance from reality--the most recent real world history event in BI is Lincoln's Assassination, a full 50 years before the game starts. Well, obviously there's the Boxer Rebellion, but that exists "inside" the canon of the universe... they don't mention the Russo-Japanese war... I'm not sure whether or not Levine has considered the issue of politics post-Lincoln.
FlutterPuffs
Member
I should read up on all that. I am not so familar with American History.
The baptism is a constant in the context of the game because there has to have been a baptism in order for the universe-hopping to occur. No baptism means that Elizabeth does not get her powers. So by drowning every Booker who shows up to the baptism, you eliminate every universe where Booker becomes Comstock, every universe where Anna is stolen, every universe where Booker goes to Columbia, every universe where Elizabeth becomes omniscient.
It does NOT eliminate every universe where Booker doesn't go to the baptism, has Anna, and lives semi-happily ever after.
I'll agree with that.
MisterRoboto
Member
I don't understand the ending credits scene. If the Elizabeths killed all forms of Booker at Wounded Knee, how is he alive with Anna after the fact?
See my post above.
If you want my personal belief, that really has no evidence to back it, I believe that if Booker goes to Wounded Knee, he must go to the baptism. However, I also believe that going to Wounded Knee is not a constant. I'm not quite sure why i think of it that way and it adds a more complicated layer to things but for some reason, that is what works in my head.
Edit: I do still, however, believe that the post-credits scene shouldn't have been there and 2K forced Levine to add it in which also makes sense that he would put in a "loophole" and you wouldn't see the scene if you skip the credits
MisterRoboto
Member
lol should have refreshed before I posted. So then are we to assume that the only Bookers who Elizabeth drowns are the ones ready to receive the baptism? If I recall we see the Booker who rejects the baptism before that scene, but the story continues.
One question that I'm still mulling over -- what explains Comstock's vision/prophecy? I understand that it must have something to do with the Luteces/tears, and him struggling to get a child because the vision told him he had one but was sterile has something to do with the memory dissonance that tears cause, but I'm still not entirely sure how these prophecies came to be. Can someone help me clarify this?
Voice of Reason
Banned
holy shit
Scott32020
Member
I was confused why Columbian forces would have an Abraham Lincoln fighting machine, but then figured out it was the Vox Populi's
I finished the game yesterday, and i have the feeling it will make me do the same research i did with Dark Souls story
I'm still somewhat confused as to why comstock is raciest, and what the hell are the tears, and the biggest question of all: who are these two couples that you meet throughout the game?!
I'm still somewhat confused as to why comstock is raciest, and what the hell are the tears, and the biggest question of all: who are these two couples that you meet throughout the game?!
Elizabeth drowns every Booker who attends the baptism, whether he accepts the baptism or not. My opinion (and others like Sorian may disagree with me) is that the Booker after the credits is one who never even went to the baptism.
This is probably the most beautiful way to put what happened there: *note* See my edit at the bottom of this post and for now know that I agree with the poster above me regarding his first sentence *note*
Thank you Stumpy!
The tear machine that the twins create is what is being used for prophecies. They can't control where the machine opens a tear to so they are just basically always watching it and taking notes on important events.
Edit: Hmm I was just re-reading what Stump wrote and I think I misinterpreted. Stump, do you believe that the drowning is meant to get rid of all Booker's or only the Bookers that accept being baptised? I believe the first is true but I think from re-reading your post again you are going for the second?
So then what specifically tells Comstock he needs to have a daughter? Do they just see a tear that shows them this?
He sees his "seed" raining fire down on New York (the same scene that Old Liz shows you). He knows he won't live long enough to have that plan happen but the tear shows him that his child will take up his mantle and continue things.
Ok, thanks.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
I found this, all voxphone diaries, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ULH_TsB_Eg
I found many (not sure how to tell), but often the playback is interrupted by other dialog or combat. I had the same issue in Bioshock 1 & 2, where I often didn't know what was happening. I guess it's my ADD.
What has been sticking out to me lately is Levines apparent fascination (or at least the writers') with the father/daughter relationship. It was a theme mildly touched upon in BioShock 1, especially in 2 (even though he really had no part in that) and now it carries over strongly into Infinite.
Levine also has no children either to my knowledge.
Levine also has no children either to my knowledge.
It seems too obvious, right?
"Kennedy said he'd put a man on the moon. I chose to place a city."
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
I was confused why Columbian forces would have an Abraham Lincoln fighting machine, but then figured out it was the Vox Populi's
I was going to ask the same thing, it seems Lincoln would be a villain and not a patriot.
ElzarTheBam
Member
In the first bioshock the first thing the female splicer says when she sees Jack is, ”is it someone new?”
The first thing the priest says when he sees Booker is, ”is it someone new?”
God I love these little details.
The first thing the priest says when he sees Booker is, ”is it someone new?”
God I love these little details.
They actually handled that pretty well in this one (and the damn prompt popped up on the screen tons of times during my playthrough so I definitely never forgot). (On xbox) if you pressed down on the d-pad, it would always play the last diary you received so if you got interrupted for whatever reason you could always wrap up what was going on then go hang out in a quiet room and hit down to hear it again. The menu for the diaries also has all the diary transcripts written out for your reading pleasure.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
I didn't think to look into the menu and read them, doh.
Okay, actually, I could get behind this. If Elizabeth only drowns the Bookers who accept baptism, it still negates Elizabeth's powers, since Comstock never exists and never steals Anna. It also negates "our" Booker, since he would never have traveled to Columbia.
I think my original idea still makes sense, though. It's simply a difference of whether Elizabeth drowns ALL Bookers who show up to the baptism, or only the Bookers who accept the baptism. The game is not clear on this fact, so both views are acceptable, and both views support the post-credit scene.
Both views are acceptable but I agree with your original idea (at least in terms of what happens at the baptism). I think I misunderstood Stump and my original post is edited to reflect that. I'm tired this morning and I must not have comprehended what he wrote the first time I read it.
All the "covers" were really cool. Shiny Happy People, Everybody Wants to Rule the World, etc. I've been listening to them on Youtube.
The One Who Knocks
Member
No, we know, for a fact that she drowns every single Booker "before the choice is made". https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=F-VJ3j2bPJk#t=946s
There is nothing unclear about who is being murdered, she directly states she is murdering Booker "before the choice is made, before you are reborn". It doesn't matter, because it's the same thing. Murdering every Booker before the baptism makes her existence and every event in the game a paradox (see EatChildren's looping timeline) and as a result it changes the variable (accept or reject) to a constant. He MUST reject the baptism because if not, it all becomes a paradox. As a result, at the end, we see the only outcome Booker can have, rejecting the baptism, and then we see a specific set of Bookers, the Bookers that have Anna and then never have her stolen because no Booker can ever accept the baptism. The reason she doesn't go directly to his birth is because otherwise the paradox occurs when Booker is born and, as a result, it would remove every universe where Booker is born to prevent the paradox. EDIT: Actually, let me think about the final sentence some more, That's my immediate thought on why not but I need to ensure that makes sense from a practical viewpoint.
EDIT: Ok, I have the reason. The same thing would be accomplished as it would still prevent the baptism. It is merely done from a narrative viewpoint to add increased drama to the revelation that Booker i Comstock by presenting us with the constant that resulted in Comstock's creation. Going back to his birth wouldn't have the same dramatic impact because it would result in us just being told, not something that was shown to us a few times already (the baptism to enter Columbia that had significant impact on Comstock/Booker and thus makes his life changing moment mandatory for everyone, the baptism shown in the ending, Comstock's discussion of 'what happens to the man in the water' which leads him to start trying to plot the probability space, the repeated drownings within the game).
Out of curiosity, what is your explanation of the post-credits scene?
DerZuhälter
Member
111 pages of spoiler discussion.
Rationalize it as long as you want people but that ending was dog poop. To be precise. Damon Lindelof's dog poop. I'm mad as hell, and don't know if I should appreciate the effort Levine made to put a somewhat decent story into a FPS, or be mad how much he botched it up.
Back to the Future, still owning the crown of rationalized time travel. Slowly disappearing makes more sense to me than multiverse theories and magical girls that can open up time rifts, just because...
Rationalize it as long as you want people but that ending was dog poop. To be precise. Damon Lindelof's dog poop. I'm mad as hell, and don't know if I should appreciate the effort Levine made to put a somewhat decent story into a FPS, or be mad how much he botched it up.
Back to the Future, still owning the crown of rationalized time travel. Slowly disappearing makes more sense to me than multiverse theories and magical girls that can open up time rifts, just because...
Finished it two hours ago in three sittings. Whew. What a ride!
I was totaly blown away by the "lighthouses ocean" and Rapture. I was like "wtfff" with mouth open.
What a beautiful game and confusing story. I loved it.
I have that "red tear" from where the song - Girls just wanna have fun stuck in my head.
That said song on the beach was awesome too.
This tear is in the house in front of LadyC's "place".
ed: oh lawl. searched and it seems it is an eegg.
I was totaly blown away by the "lighthouses ocean" and Rapture. I was like "wtfff" with mouth open.
What a beautiful game and confusing story. I loved it.
I have that "red tear" from where the song - Girls just wanna have fun stuck in my head.
That said song on the beach was awesome too.
This tear is in the house in front of LadyC's "place".
ed: oh lawl. searched and it seems it is an eegg.