• 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

Metroidvania

People called Romanes they go the house?
Everyone remember the guitar scene? (I pity you if you missed it on your playthrough, so beautiful). I would have really appreciated another similar scene set up (having Booker examine something arbitrary in plain view) that had them both sit down and just have an honest talk. Maybe Liz breaks down and the consoling is more than just "Press X to Jason Console" I think that could have made another lovely scene.

I saw it, and appreciated it for humanizing Liz and Booker's relationship and the reality of the struggle of the Vox Populi versus the Founders, but IIRC, that's really the only non-expository plot-reveal conversation for either herself or Booker that I remember the pair having. To be honest, the scene seemed sort of weird to me, especially that you pass a lot of other similar distractions and only receive minor interactions between Liz and an NPC.

Like I said earlier, I grant that the game is on a time schedule and has a large degree of urgency, but that's not a whole lot of non-essential-plot related development. Liz as a character is essentially a walking semi-encyclopedia on Columbia with tearing and lock-picking abilities. This is probably due to her lack of any real human interaction during her development, to be fair, but I don't know if the game addresses that as well as I would have liked.

This is what I've been wondering. If he gets drowned, how can he continue to become the baby booker?

I never gave it any thought because you kill him before he becomes Comstock, no more evil Comstock.. but you kill debt ridden Booker too. Is the point being made that he and elizabeth cease to exist but that stops the evil and chaos they would have brought too?

Someone wrote this earlier, but as I see it, it isn't about killing Booker, it's changing the nature of the timeline, removing the 'variable' of the choice from becoming Comstock or refusing into a 'constant' of any Booker who undergoes the baptism dying. Since this introduces a paradox (how does Liz come back from the past to kill Booker if she never exists), the universe shifts tracks to only 'allow' the non-baptism Booker to exist.
 

Screaming Meat

Unconfirmed Member
The writers get around this by introducing constants. It is a constant that Booker makes a choice at the baptism. Every Booker that survives will go to the baptism and make a choice. The difference is that Booker accepting the baptism will lead to a paradox and a paradox is not a probability, it's a paradox.

Right, but there isn't just one universe where he either accepts the baptism, one where he doesn't and one where he drowns. There are specifically an infinite number of universes where every choice is played out. Even if the baptism is a constant, the drowning would always be another outcome of it, surely?

(Love your avatar and screen name, btw)

After seeing that last scene I think the drowning of Booker was less about stopping Comstock and more about stopping the creation and use of the tears in the first place.

I like this a lot. Good call.

EDIT: Also, it isn't solely time travel since Elizabeth is murdering every single version of Booker before he makes a choice at the baptism and every single Booker goes to the baptism and makes a choice. This makes it a paradox in every single infinite set of universes where Booker accepts (because if, in any universe, Booker accepts it will lead to the paradox). Even if we assume she only strangles acception Bookers then that still becomes a paradox and thus cannot happen. Either way, the choice that's made becomes a constant to avoid the paradox.

EDIT: Ok, so, if Booker ever accepts the baptism, in any universe Comstock can never meet the Luteces which would lead to Comstock buying Anna which would lead to Elizabeth's existence and the Luteces becoming trapped in the timeline which would lead to Booker entering the acception universes which would lead to Booker saving the Luteces which would lead to Elizabeth becoming omnipotent which would lead to Elizabeth drowning every single Booker in every single infinite set of spaces in which Booker survives Wounded Knee which means Booker could never accept baptism and become Comstock which means he can never meet the Luteces etc. The reason for this is that Elizabeth will end up murdering Comstock/Booker at the baptism preventing everything from occuring after it has occured. This is a looping paradox. If it was only one version of Comstock it wouldn't matter but since they're specifically going back to murder Comstock it would make no sense if they don't murder them all (symbolised by every Elizabeth murdering the single Booker at the constant).

I missed this, sorry. That is a good point about the symbolism. The thing is, the explanation sounds more like time travel talk! :p All those possibilities already exist in all the infinite universes with their infinite choices.

Also, killing an infinite number of anything would take an infinite amount of time, right?

Also, working from your explanation, that final scene where the last Elizabeth is blacked out rather than seen disappearing... could that be symbolic of that whole probability disappearing? I'm not even sure that made sense...
 
Liz doesn't really do much special for me, the only thing I really appreciate about her is instead of standing there, she'll do her own thing, look in suitcases and on desks, or lean on the wall while I'm looking about.
 

Eusis

Member
It's not possible for Booker not to attend the baptism if it being a constant is to be believed.
I probably need to look into it more, but I imagine (or like to imagine anyway) that these constants are more for if certain events are to occur: for Bioshock Infinite to happen (and perhaps by association all events Elizabeth can look into) Booker MUST go to baptism. Any other possibility (never going to the baptism, never going into the military, being born female, not being born at all) would not have resulted in Bioshock Infinite or led to it. As such, she eliminated the constant necessary for her existence as she is, and all that's left are the other possibilities that don't involve going to baptism out of guilt from the war.

Of course I guess just eliminating the possibility he COULD accept baptism is enough, but there's that implication of avoiding the baptism situation at all.
 

Blinck

Member
Ok got a screenshot about the easter egg I was talking about earlier. This is not present on the first dream sequence, only on the second one after your first encounter with elizabeth and songbird. Not sure if it's present on the next ones.

rapture_tribune_bioshockinfinite.jpg


Edit: Quote from the Bioshock 2 wiki to give some context : "Stanley Poole is a character in BioShock 2. A former reporter for the Rapture Tribune, Stanley was used by Andrew Ryan to spy on Lamb's Rapture Family prior to the Civil War."
 

Sorian

Banned
That wasn't character development. It actually just felt out of place to me.

You are on your way to a specific task. There isn't even any reason for narrative downtime. Then you just find a guitar in the corner and randomly start playing and she sings. I'm not against the scene but I dont' quite understand how suddenly her breaking out into song = character depth. They don't even mention it nor does it transition into any kind of conversation about anything at all. Not even small talk. You literally randomly pick up a guitar in the middle of hallways of shooting dudes and she randomly sings a few bars of a song. It felt like scraps of a scene that was originally meant to be more fully developed. You guys must think American Idol is the deepest thing on TV.

Did you even read what you quoted? I said it was a beautiful scene. I did not say it gave any character development. I said another similar scene but where they just sat down and chatted instead would have been a great way to get in some character development. I also bolded that last part because I assume you didn't bother to read my entire post because you thought your comment at the bottom there was so witty although in the end, it just makes you sound like an ass.
 

Max O Power

Neo Member
Liz doesn't really do much special for me, the only thing I really appreciate about her is instead of standing there, she'll do her own thing, look in suitcases and on desks, or lean on the wall while I'm looking about.

The thing I like the most, and maybe it's a weird thing, was sometimes when running, she would run in front of me in the same directions as I was running. I wasn't necessarily heading for the next way point. I was just running in some direction, and so was she. Her way of taking insensitive and not just following me around really did a lot for me. She would also sometimes take a different set of stairs. Her path finding is really great, did a lot for me in the way of making her believable.
 

nbthedude

Member
Did you even read what you quoted? I said it was a beautiful scene. I did not say it gave any character development. I said another similar scene but where they just sat down and chatted instead would have been a great way to get in some character development. I also bolded that last part because I assume you didn't bother to read my entire post because you thought your comment at the bottom there was so witty although in the end, it just makes you sound like an ass.

You bolded a quote where the dude said their interaction was shallow and then you brought up the guitar scene as a counterpoint.
 
Right, but there isn't just one universe where he either accepts the baptism, one where he doesn't and one where he drowns. There are specifically an infinite number of universes where every choice is played out. Even if the baptism is a constant, the drowning would always be another outcome of it, surely?

There's a reason that Elizabeth takes Booker back to the baptism instead of Booker as a baby. Since Booker becomes Comstock, Booker's literal wish of smothering Comstock in his crib would be going back and eliminating himself as a baby, thus eliminating Booker completely from any timeline, from ever being at Wounded Knee, etc. etc.

The reason the drowning at the baptism happens is to eliminate Comstock and only Comstock, which is why the post-credits scene occurs. As others have pointed out, Elizabeth drowning Booker at the baptism creates a paradox, which essentially removes Comstock from existence along with herself. Booker now still lives, but in order to prevent a paradox from happening he will always refuse the baptism instead of splitting the timeline. Thus no tears are ever created, Columbia is never created, the Luteces never get trapped, and Elizabeth who can see all the doors ceases to be.

There is only Booker and Anna.

And I think Elizabeth knows this when she asks Booker, so even though it's implied that Booker is unwittingly sacrificing himself, it's actually Elizabeth that's sacrificing herself and her existence. There's a reason Booker only realizes he's Comstock right before Elizabeth forcibly drowns him. It's because he would realize Elizabeth is eliminating herself too and he may have changed his mind trying to protect her.
 

Sorian

Banned
You bolded a quote where the dude said their interaction was shallow and then you brought up the guitar scene as a counterpoint.

No, I agreed with the bolded quote and said that having another scene that was initiated in the same way as the guitar scene was but with a more character developement driven focus would have lent much to addressing the concern. I'll just pretend you skipped over everything as opposed to assuming that you read it and just didn't comprehend.
 
N

Noray

Unconfirmed Member
Haven't seen anybody post this yet: http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/594747728594201884/51EF1E1B8BA7AAA0D29FF0A1C518416387BE9FC1/

Saw it in Comstock's office aboard the Hand of the Prophet. The text is all eligible but it looks like he was plotting out the branching universe or something... guy knew a lot it seems.

Also in that room and in his adjoining bedroom, some pictures and book of Paris. That just made me really sad for some reason...

Also something changed my mind on our Booker dying and being replaced in the story. The first two times, after the Baptism on arrival and falling from Monument Island, you do wake up somewhere else after having a vision of the office. But the third time, right before Comstock House, Songbird throws you through a window and you black out and see the office again, with Lutece in it and you open the door to the baby room, then you're right back there in the room with Songbird and Liz gets taken. If Booker died at that point, he wouldn't end up right back there with Songbird, right? Maybe it is just Booker trying to piece his real memories together.
 

Screaming Meat

Unconfirmed Member
There's a reason that Elizabeth takes Booker back to the baptism instead of Booker as a baby. Since Booker becomes Comstock, Booker's literal wish of smothering Comstock in his crib would be going back and eliminating himself as a baby, thus eliminating Booker completely from any timeline, from ever being at Wounded Knee, etc. etc.

The reason the drowning at the baptism happens is to eliminate Comstock and only Comstock, which is why the post-credits scene occurs. As others have pointed out, Elizabeth drowning Booker at the baptism creates a paradox, which essentially removes Comstock from existence along with herself. Booker now still lives, but in order to prevent a paradox from happening he will always refuse the baptism instead of splitting the timeline. Thus no tears are ever created, Columbia is never created, the Luteces never get trapped, and Elizabeth who can see all the doors ceases to be.

There is only Booker and Anna.

And I think Elizabeth knows this when she asks Booker, so even though it's implied that Booker is unwittingly sacrificing himself, it's actually Elizabeth that's sacrificing herself and her existence. There's a reason Booker only realizes he's Comstock right before Elizabeth forcibly drowns him. It's because he would realize Elizabeth is eliminating herself too and he may have changed his mind trying to protect her.

Nicely put, but Comstock isn't only in one reality, we pass through at least two or three where he exists. How does our Booker drowning prevent the creation of other Comstocks when we know he is "gambling alcho" Booker? The Booker that Elizabeth drowns at the baptism isn't the Booker who becomes Comstock, is he...?

EDIT: I'm just gonna play it again and pay double the attention :D
 

Sblargh

Banned
I do love Elizabeth as a gaming companion. She has only positive features. Never dies, never gets caught, toss you items.
The tossing of money during peace time is a bit weird and sometimes goes over other dialogue which creates weird situations, but it is a thrill to be pinned down by enemies and that "Press [F]" appears. It really creates a dynamic situation regarding what resources you have or don't.
 

Sorian

Banned
Nicely put, but Comstock isn't only in one reality, we pass through at least two or three where he exists. How does our Booker drowning prevent the creation of other Comstocks when we know he is "gambling alcho" Booker? The Booker that Elizabeth drowns at the baptism isn't the Booker who becomes Comstock, is he...?

Elizabeth drowns the Booker that is about to decide whether to be baptised or not. This effectively destroys all timelines where Booker gets baptised and all timelines where Booker does not get baptised. I'm almost 99% sure that is the intention of the ending. To explain the scene is more of a mystery. Did Elizabeth teleport you to that exact time in history before any choice was made and put you in your younger selfs body? Were the multiple Elizabeths supposed to be a metaphor showing that this was happening in an infinite amount of realities at the same time? Idk but I can say that the point was to erase the choice from ever being made.
 

d0c_zaius

Member
I do love Elizabeth as a gaming companion. She has only positive features. Never dies, never gets caught, toss you items.
The tossing of money during peace time is a bit weird and sometimes goes over other dialogue which creates weird situations, but it is a thrill to be pinned down by enemies and that "Press [F]" appears. It really creates a dynamic situation regarding what resources you have or don't.

I disagree. It comes off forced and awkward. Giving me money after I spent my money, pulling complete rocket launchers out of no where, forcing me into some locked camera switch in the middle of combat or looting items. It's bad enough that she kills any sense of looking for ammo cause I can just spam rockets and rely on her to do something.
 

dejay

Banned
One thing puzzles me about the end (post credits). When Booker wakes up in, I think, 1893, he calls out Anna's name in surprise like he thinks she's not going to be there. "Anna, is that you?"

If the timelines were 'fixed' by Liz's sacrifice, there should be no surprise in his voice. This implies that a) he retains memories from the Booker that got erased or b) he sold the baby and somehow she is back (or imagines she is back).

I'm also trying to tell if the last scene where the alternative Liz's fade away means something. The last Liz, our Liz, looks up at the door as the camera pans up to it, where as the other Liz's didn't look up from the water. Was she seeing the "fixed" timelines through the door before her existence ended or is there something else?

Elizabeth drowns the Booker that is about to decide whether to be baptised or not. This effectively destroys all timelines where Booker gets baptised and all timelines where Booker does not get baptised. I'm almost 99% sure that is the intention of the ending. To explain the scene is more of a mystery. Did Elizabeth teleport you to that exact time in history before any choice was made and put you in your younger selfs body? Were the multiple Elizabeths supposed to be a metaphor showing that this was happening in an infinite amount of realities at the same time? Idk but I can say that the point was to erase the choice from ever being made.

Yeah, she says "Before the choice is made...before you are reborn" - although closing off timeline might just mean he just never makes a choice to be baptised.
 

Sorian

Banned
Hmm. Was it optional? I remember a bar but haven't seen a guitar. Was it part of the side quest where you had to press a button at a cash desk?

It was optional but there was no side-quest involved. You went downstairs and there was a guitar leaned against a chair right in front of you. Getting close gave you a prompt and clicking it had Booker sit down and start playing.
 

ekim

Member
It was optional but there was no side-quest involved. You went downstairs and there was a guitar leaned against a chair right in front of you. Getting close gave you a prompt and clicking it had Booker sit down and start playing.

Damn. Didn't notice it :( time for another playthrough.
 
Nicely put, but Comstock isn't only in one reality, we pass through at least two or three where he exists. How does our Booker drowning prevent the creation of other Comstocks when we know he is "gambling alcho" Booker? The Booker that Elizabeth drowns at the baptism isn't the Booker who becomes Comstock, is he...?

It all, ultimately, is due to the paradox. Before the events of the game, there are infinite Comstocks. There are infinite Bookers. There are infinite everybodys and everythings. All of these are subsets of other subsets of other subsets of infinite subsets. In every single universe where Booker does not die in Wounded Knee, he MUST attend the baptism. This is a fixed point in every single reality. Since every Booker is forcibly drowned by Elizabeth at the baptism (it has to be before a choice is made at the baptism because, if it is after, some Bookers may be baptised later on and then become Comstock trapping them in the 'loop' again), every single Booker dies, in every reality. What this basically means is that, in every single reality no matter what, Booker dies. However, Elizabeth's existence can only occur if Comstock exists (which means Booker accepted the baptism). Now, there were an infinite set of Comstocks, there were some where Comstock founded Columbia and it was paradise, some where he never used the machine, some where he never stole Anna and so on, but none of this matters because, in one universe, Comstock existing made every single existence of Comstock a paradox (because Elizabeth murdered every Booker before any decision was made). The only possible set of realities that can exist, without the paradox, are universes where Elizabeth doesn't exist and thus, universes where Comstock cannot exist, making the rejection a constant (there are still an infinite number of Bookers that reject the baptism though).

EDIT:
I probably need to look into it more, but I imagine (or like to imagine anyway) that these constants are more for if certain events are to occur: for Bioshock Infinite to happen (and perhaps by association all events Elizabeth can look into) Booker MUST go to baptism. Any other possibility (never going to the baptism, never going into the military, being born female, not being born at all) would not have resulted in Bioshock Infinite or led to it. As such, she eliminated the constant necessary for her existence as she is, and all that's left are the other possibilities that don't involve going to baptism out of guilt from the war.

Of course I guess just eliminating the possibility he COULD accept baptism is enough, but there's that implication of avoiding the baptism situation at all.
I will need to think further on this but my immediate reaction is that the constants are things that always happen in universes with a specific set of variables and the constants are precisely that, constants, things that must happen. The reasoning for this is related to the introduction of the constant and variable segment (with regard to the lighthouse) where emphasis is placed on always (which is after Elizabeth's full set of power is granted). 'There are a million million of worlds, all different, all similar. Constants and variables. There is always a lighthouse, there's always a man, there's always a city. I can see them through the doors' (roughly) to me anyway, fixes the ideas that the constants always happen. So, in every universe that exists, there is a man, a lighthouse, a city. Similarly, in every universe where Booker survived Wounded Knee (and thus, in every universe where he went through these events) the constant of the baptism exists. I'm not sure if that really addresses the question of the specificities of the constants and variables though.
 

Visceir

Member
Could just youtube for "bioshock infinite guitar", I'm sure there are clips of it on youtube. The song is the same they sang in end credits

The Siphon prevents her from "teleporting" herself out of Columbia through a Tear.

So what would happen if she walked into that Paris tear she opened?
 

DarkKyo

Member
I do love Elizabeth as a gaming companion. She has only positive features. Never dies, never gets caught, toss you items.
The tossing of money during peace time is a bit weird and sometimes goes over other dialogue which creates weird situations, but it is a thrill to be pinned down by enemies and that "Press [F]" appears. It really creates a dynamic situation regarding what resources you have or don't.

I was watching my friend on his first playthrough last night and she threw Salt through a clerk's window opening at Booker, it looked super amazingly cool at the time.
 
I disagree. It comes off forced and awkward. Giving me money after I spent my money, pulling complete rocket launchers out of no where, forcing me into some locked camera switch in the middle of combat or looting items. It's bad enough that she kills any sense of looking for ammo cause I can just spam rockets and rely on her to do something.
I really did not like the switching camera, and pressing the prompt for it in battle. I would never say no to more health, salts or ammo when I'm low on it so I wouldn't mind an option for me to always accept it, and perhaps a UI prompt instead of turning me completely around.

At least it puts you back in the right camera perspective afterwards.
 

Guevara

Member
Haven't seen anybody post this yet: http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/594747728594201884/51EF1E1B8BA7AAA0D29FF0A1C518416387BE9FC1/

Saw it in Comstock's office aboard the Hand of the Prophet. The text is all eligible but it looks like he was plotting out the branching universe or something... guy knew a lot it seems.

Also in that room and in his adjoining bedroom, some pictures and book of Paris. That just made me really sad for some reason...

Also something changed my mind on our Booker dying and being replaced in the story. The first two times, after the Baptism on arrival and falling from Monument Island, you do wake up somewhere else after having a vision of the office. But the third time, right before Comstock House, Songbird throws you through a window and you black out and see the office again, with Lutece in it and you open the door to the baby room, then you're right back there in the room with Songbird and Liz gets taken. If Booker died at that point, he wouldn't end up right back there with Songbird, right? Maybe it is just Booker trying to piece his real memories together.
I never saw that image, that's neat.
 

Sorian

Banned
I really did not like the switching camera, and pressing the prompt for it in battle. I would never say no to more health, salts or ammo when I'm low on it so I wouldn't mind an option for me to always accept it, and perhaps a UI prompt instead of turning me completely around.

At least it puts you back in the right camera perspective afterwards.

At least it gave you invincibility frames during the camera switch.
 
Nicely put, but Comstock isn't only in one reality, we pass through at least two or three where he exists. How does our Booker drowning prevent the creation of other Comstocks when we know he is "gambling alcho" Booker? The Booker that Elizabeth drowns at the baptism isn't the Booker who becomes Comstock, is he...?

EDIT: I'm just gonna play it again and pay double the attention :D

To make it simple, think of time as a tree. Booker's life up until the baptism is the trunk. At the baptism, the trunk branches into two sections: the Comstock branch and the Booker branch. Now after that, the Comstock branch itself splits off into infinite smaller Comstock branches. But Elizabeth's actions snap off the branch at the beginning, right at the trunk, so all the infinite later branches fall off as well. Thus only the Booker branch is left on the tree.
 

Guevara

Member
To make it simple, think of time as a tree. Booker's life up until the baptism is the trunk. At the baptism, the trunk branches into two sections: the Comstock branch and the Booker branch. Now after that, the Comstock branch itself splits off into infinite smaller Comstock branches. But Elizabeth's actions snap off the branch at the beginning, right at the trunk, so all the infinite later branches fall off as well. Thus only the Booker branch is left on the tree.
This is a great concise way of putting it.

And there are still an infinite number of possible Booker branches (which I think lady Lutece says)
 

Sorian

Banned
To make it simple, think of time as a tree. Booker's life up until the baptism is the trunk. At the baptism, the trunk branches into two sections: the Comstock branch and the Booker branch. Now after that, the Comstock branch itself splits off into infinite smaller Comstock branches. But Elizabeth's actions snap off the branch at the beginning, right at the trunk, so all the infinite later branches fall off as well. Thus only the Booker branch is left on the tree.

Your example is beautiful and I will use it to tell you that you are wrong. :p

Do you remember how Fitzroy kept saying that the only way to make sure that something is gone is to remove the root? How do you make certain that the Comstock branches aren't ever going to appear on the tree? Pull the tree out at its roots. Everything before the baptism doesn't matter in Booker's life so, like you said, the baptism is the trunk. What is right below the trunk? The roots. Where did Elizabeth bring you? To right before the baptism. This point in time is the roots. She kills you here and removes the entire tree. There is no Comstock branches but there are also no Booker branches. The tree is dead. Booker is dead.
 
A tree is a wrong way to put it, mostly because most of Booker's side is because of what Comstock decided to do to him when he took Anna.

It's more like Universe A and B and B will always enter A and mess with it. At the end of the game when Booker is killed the means for B to mess with A never exist so everyone is put back in their cage again and never interact. That's why we see Booker with Anna after the credits.
 

JerkShep

Member
Elizabeth drowns the Booker that is about to decide whether to be baptised or not. This effectively destroys all timelines where Booker gets baptised and all timelines where Booker does not get baptised. I'm almost 99% sure that is the intention of the ending. To explain the scene is more of a mystery. Did Elizabeth teleport you to that exact time in history before any choice was made and put you in your younger selfs body? Were the multiple Elizabeths supposed to be a metaphor showing that this was happening in an infinite amount of realities at the same time? Idk but I can say that the point was to erase the choice from ever being made.

I just finished the game so I'm not sure of anything right now, but in every "flashback" before the actual ending (giving away Anna, trying to stop Comstock afterwards etc) you see the scenes from the point of view of the Booker of that particular time. "Your" Booker talks but it's like a consciousness inside the Booker in that particular moment of time, he's a spectator (you, the player, do some actions but you're just reliving what happened I guess). So I think in the ending Elizabeth is not killing "your" Booker, she's killing the Booker of the baptism and you're just seeing it. I don't know what that means for "your" Booker: he should be dead too since they killed his past self, but the post ending scene seems to imply otherwise...in some way.
 

Screaming Meat

Unconfirmed Member
Elizabeth drowns the Booker that is about to decide whether to be baptised or not. This effectively destroys all timelines where Booker gets baptised and all timelines where Booker does not get baptised. I'm almost 99% sure that is the intention of the ending. To explain the scene is more of a mystery. Did Elizabeth teleport you to that exact time in history before any choice was made and put you in your younger selfs body? Were the multiple Elizabeths supposed to be a metaphor showing that this was happening in an infinite amount of realities at the same time? Idk but I can say that the point was to erase the choice from ever being made.

I get what the ending was about, honest! I'm just brain-farting about it, really.

SO: although it is involved to some degree, we're not talking specifically about time-travel where proceeding events would effect later ones, we're talking about whole parallel universes where every possibility is played out, hence Elizabeth preventing Booker becoming Comstock would already be a universe that exists even before the finale crops up.

There isn't just one universe where that baptism occurs, there are at least two or three (Rejects, accepts and drowns) that we are aware of and, I imagine, there would likely be many more covering any number of variables (he picks his nose just before, he tripped up on the way to the baptism, a fly went in his ear etc - each one has it's own seperate universe). Off of those would be any number of possible universes where he does something entirely different after the baptism (Becomes muslim, has a sex change, eats raw fish etc.). The same thing would be prior to that, too.

To make it simple, think of time as a tree. Booker's life up until the baptism is the trunk. At the baptism, the trunk branches into two sections: the Comstock branch and the Booker branch. Now after that, the Comstock branch itself splits off into infinite smaller Comstock branches. But Elizabeth's actions snap off the branch at the beginning, right at the trunk, so all the infinite later branches fall off as well. Thus only the Booker branch is left on the tree.

That's all well and good if it were just time travel, but there are whole parallel realities to account for; realties that run alongside this one.
 

ekim

Member
At least it gave you invincibility frames during the camera switch.

It's also worth noting that in my opinion every criticism regarding the gameplay is only legit because everything else is executed so well causing minor flaws standing out more.
 
Your example is beautiful and I will use it to tell you that you are wrong. :p

Do you remember how Fitzroy kept saying that the only way to make sure that something is gone is to remove the root? How do you make certain that the Comstock branches aren't ever going to appear on the tree? Pull the tree out at its roots. Everything before the baptism doesn't matter in Booker's life so, like you said, the baptism is the trunk. What is right below the trunk? The roots. Where did Elizabeth bring you? To right before the baptism. This point in time is the roots. She kills you here and removes the entire tree. There is no Comstock branches but there are also no Booker branches. The tree is dead. Booker is dead.

I'd absolutely agree with you if the post-credits sequence didn't exist. But because it's there, there must be a reason Booker is waking up again in his office, and thus the paradox explanation. Now granted there's a whole different debate on whether it was just put there to instill hope or not, but considering how thought out the entire rest of the game was, there had to be a specific intention and reason they put a 10 second sequence post credits in relation to the overall story.

(Also as a complete side note, why does Booker have a crib at his work office anyway?)
 

Sorian

Banned
I get what the ending was about, honest! I'm just brain-farting about it, really.

SO: although it is involved to some degree, we're not talking specifically about time-travel where proceeding events would effect later ones, we're talking about whole parallel universes where every possibility is played out, hence Elizabeth preventing Booker becoming Comstock would already be a universe that exists even before the finale crops up.

There isn't just one universe where that baptism occurs, there are at least two or three (Rejects, accepts and drowns) that we are aware of and, I imagine, there would likely be many more covering any number of variables (he picks his nose just before, he tripped up on the way to the baptism, a fly went in his ear etc - each one has it's own seperate universe). Off of those would be any number of possible universes where he does something entirely different after the baptism (Becomes muslim, has a sex change, eats raw fish etc.).

I think I get where the confusion is coming in. IMO Levine put some restraints into his story that normal quantum mechanics doesn't actually have. You are trying to apply the full quantum mechanic theory but doing that makes the story an impossible tale to tell. Instead you'll notice that Levine crafted a story where the universe only branches by two at a time. Does he get baptized or not? Is the genius going to be a born a girl or a boy? Did the weapon maker live or die? Did his tools get taken or not? Did booker die here or not? It's always a split into two. At the baptism scene either he gets baptised or does not. The other little variables don't make enough of an impact to create a new reality. That is the limitation I believe is set on the story. There was never a reality where Booker was drowned in that reality. Elizabeth becoming a time god and going back there is such a big deal because she breaks this "law of 2s" and creates her own third option. Drowning.
 

LProtag

Member
Was there anything prior to the ending that hinted that Booker was Comstock?

Tons of recordings from Comstock talking about baptism and being reborn. Slate talking to Booker about how he and Booker were the heroes at Wounded Knee, and not Comstock. Plenty of foreshadowing, nothing explicit though.
 
Was there anything prior to the ending that hinted that Booker was Comstock?

The whole section with Slate and saying Comstock was never at Wounded Knee. That was actually done really well because considering Comstock's character up until that point, I completely brushed it off as "religious maniac taking credit for something to instill hope in his followers." It completely made sense in context for Comstock to create fraudulent claims. Little did I know...

I'll be 100% honest and say that I hate the post-credit scene and I truly believe that 2K told Ken that the game had to have some type of "happy" ending so he just threw that in to appease his publisher. It wouldn't be the first time he had to compromise an ending for them.

Personally I like the post-credits addition because it's bringing about the discussion. Without it, the discussion is "Well, Booker's dead." Now it's "Is he dead? Is he alive? Which timelines still exist?" There's a lot more left up to interpretation.
 

Sorian

Banned
I'd absolutely agree with you if the post-credits sequence didn't exist. But because it's there, there must be a reason Booker is waking up again in his office, and thus the paradox explanation. Now granted there's a whole different debate on whether it was just put there to instill hope or not, but considering how thought out the entire rest of the game was, there had to be a specific intention and reason they put a 10 second sequence post credits in relation to the overall story.

(Also as a complete side note, why does Booker have a crib at his work office anyway?)

I'll be 100% honest and say that I hate the post-credit scene and I truly believe that 2K told Ken that the game had to have some type of "happy" ending so he just threw that in to appease his publisher. It wouldn't be the first time he had to compromise an ending for them.

(I think Booker only owned his work office and was "homeless" otherwise. That is total speculation but it makes sense with how desperate he is to get out from under his debt)

I originally edited this into my last post but I felt like giving it its own post :p
 

ezekial45

Banned
Yeah, I must've missed 20 or so recordings. I thought I was pretty thorough.

One last question -- when then twins brought Booker into Comstock's timeline was he at his 1912 age? Or was he pulled from his 1893 timeline (when Anna/Elizabeth was taken) and brought into Comstock's future 1912.
 
Top Bottom