Bioshock Infinite is amazing (SPOILERS!!!)

+
Bioshock Infinite is amazing (SPOILERS!!!)

hopefully more have played it so we can discuss it and turn it into a spoilers thread will keep my feelings hidden for now.
 
So far it's pretty shooter-y. I'll know more when I'm further in, but i'd have to say it's Bioshock In Air. Which is fine. Hours in and I'm not enthralled though.
 
So far it's pretty shooter-y. I'll know more when I'm further in, but i'd have to say it's Bioshock In Air. Which is fine. Hours in and I'm not enthralled though.

bioshock is/was never about the shooting, its about experiencing the the story.
 

227

Forum veteran
Please tell me when this becomes a spoiler-y thread. I have a problem with the ending and I'm wondering if anyone can adequately explain it away.
 

227

Forum veteran
ok its going spoilers now. whats your question?
Is it possible to change the title? Not everyone reads every post, so they could easily land on a spoiler in a thread that says "no spoilers exist." Worst case I could just PM you the question.
 
Is it possible to change the title? Not everyone reads every post, so they could easily land on a spoiler in a thread that says "no spoilers exist." Worst case I could just PM you the question.

PM me, and i did change if you check my OP but it doesnt show at the forums. its a wellknown bug with these bb forums.
 

227

Forum veteran
Oh, I already sent the PM. Guess I'll just copy/paste it here:

Okay, so my problem is with the very ending. The drowning. So it makes sense that that's the point where that version of Booker took the baptism and became Comstock, but why is that necessary? He accepts the Elizabeths drowning him, meaning that "our" version of Booker has control—if he has control in that moment, why not just refuse the baptism? Comstock would never be created. Hell, if he's both past Booker and present Booker, why not just refuse the baptism (destroying every possibility of Comstock in the future) and live happily ever after from that moment on with Elizabeth?

The whole drowning bit seems completely unnecessary when he could just avoid making the decision in the first place and continue living.

And what I forgot to add in the PM is that it seems that it would even be a better ending, because he becomes a better person throughout the events of the game. Sure, not becoming Comstock and thus having no one to sell Anna to will keep him from being as bad of a person as the Booker in the beginning was because of her presence, but he still did a lot of things that he regretted by that point (which seemed pretty clear from the bit at the Hall of Heroes) and would still be the kind of person who would sell her in the first place. In a sense, he just allowed for a version of himself where he avoided that one mistake as opposed to continuing on as an all-around better person.
 
because for every booker there is a comstock, i guess elizabeth used her special powers to kill booker, had he refused the babtism in a parallel universe he would have accepted it, only by dying it would have made sure comstock would have never existed. and dont forget the ending where you're back at the office and you are calling out annas name, its possible that elizabeth sent booker back to a place where he would never give her up hence the ending. also at the babtism you never saw the last elizabeth disappear. meaning in one universe booker raises anna.

the ending is ambiguous for sure it is what you make of it. the date he gave away anna is the same date as the scene after the credits. so the dilema is was annan there or not. if not then the circle continues forever. or should i say infinite...
 

227

Forum veteran
But dying is the same as making a decision. There are parallel worlds where the person is alive even when they're dead in one universe, as seen by all those people you killed who are between life and death after you go through a tear, so it stands to reason that killing Booker would be meaningless. He'd just refuse to accept the drowning in a parallel world, anyway.
 
But dying is the same as making a decision. There are parallel worlds where the person is alive even when they're dead in one universe, as seen by all those people you killed who are between life and death after you go through a tear, so it stands to reason that killing Booker would be meaningless. He'd just refuse to accept the drowning in a parallel world, anyway.

not really cause you killed him before he made the decision to be babtized or not that was the vortex of the timeline, the game constantly made references to modern physics and schrodinger's cat. by killing booker you never put the cat in the box to begin with, hence no split dimensions.
but ya obviously it was dramatic but thats the point.
 

227

Forum veteran
by killing booker you never put the cat in the box to begin with, hence no split dimensions.
Wait wait wait, I was under the impression that every decision split into different worlds. You make it sound like this phenomenon revolves around the events of the game while I understood it more to be the way the universe has always been. Did I miss something?

Another question: I was thinking about killing people in one universe and how that manifests in another universe, and I can't really figure out why that happens. Those you kill somehow "remember" being both dead and alive. I was under the impression that going through a tear was like going through a door, but it seems like the two of you carry parts of the other universe with you. If you didn't, then how would those people ever remember being dead in the first place?

I suppose if Elizabeth drowning Booker could trap the version of him that refuses to allow for that in such a state it could make the whole drowning thing uniquely suited for removing all possibilities of him ever becoming Comstock, but it didn't seem like the kind of thing that she could control. I didn't find anything that explained why the different universe versions of some people were randomly mixing, either. Anyone find something I missed that explains that a bit more in-depth? Not everyone that died (like the guy who was pinned up on the wall when Fink was testing you, or Booker in the universe where he died a hero) was caught in that state, so it seems like a pretty weak thing to rest the necessity of the drowning on.
 
well one theory is that by drowning he kills the drunken booker dimension that sells anna, and he also kills comstock, but that he creates a alt dimension where he doesnt drown and turns into sober booker and doesnt sell anna, which is kinda the ending we saw after the credits.

as for npcs dying in one dimension then going crazy not sure exactly what was going on im sure there is an explanation.
 

227

Forum veteran
well one theory is that by drowning he kills the drunken booker dimension that sells anna, and he also kills comstock, but that he creates a alt dimension where he doesnt drown and turns into sober booker and doesnt sell anna, which is kinda the ending we saw after the credits.
Interesting theory: what if Elizabeth made drowning seem like a form of penance unnecessarily, since the version of him that became Comstock was the one that was looking for it? The Booker that needed redemption would be dead, while the version of him that ran away from it (which became "our" Booker) refuses it like the baptism, meaning that only our version of Booker survives.

This would depend on him being a mixture of both past and present Booker in that moment, however, while he only seemed to be the present version. I'd have liked to see a version of the ending where he refused, though.

Late edit: Thinking about it some more, why didn't Elizabeth just go kill the version of him that accepts the baptism alone? If killing works, then it's completely unnecessary for our Booker to die since ours is well beyond the point from which the Comstock variations spring from. We may have been more willing than past Booker, but there's no reason why the past version has to die willingly. It would be easy enough for her to leave our Booker behind for a moment, sneak up behind the past version before the baptism, and put one in his head before he even knows that she's there. The whole "infinite worlds" thing seems like this huge topic that the developers didn't think all the way through, because there are a number of ways the characters could have circumvented the game's ending entirely while keeping what they had found over the course of the journey.

as for npcs dying in one dimension then going crazy not sure exactly what was going on im sure there is an explanation.
Yeah, I hope someone knows what the deal is with that. Seems like too big a plot point to leave it completely unresolved.
 
poor Songbird :( i liked him



 
Top Bottom