SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion

I am desperately hoping its not something that drives the story nowhere, like just placing us in the shoes of some Vox guy, or some other npc peon.

That would be disappointing. Let us play as the Lettuce's or something lol

That would be brilliant. Imagine if Irrational use the DLC's to explain the game fully, or at least flesh it out.

Just give me more columbia to explore and I'm there!
Technically I already am since I bought the season pass, BOOM!

Is there a significant catchphrase/line in this game that it will be remembered by?

#TeamDIMWITT
 
That would be brilliant. Imagine if Irrational use the DLC's to explain the game fully, or at least flesh it out.

Just give me more columbia to explore and I'm there!
Technically I already am since I bought the season pass, BOOM!

Is there a significant catchphrase/line in this game that it will be remembered by?

#TeamDIMWITT

Give us the girl, wipe away the debt.
 
That would be brilliant. Imagine if Irrational use the DLC's to explain the game fully, or at least flesh it out.

Just give me more columbia to explore and I'm there!
Technically I already am since I bought the season pass, BOOM!

Is there a significant catchphrase/line in this game that it will be remembered by?

#TeamDIMWITT

HEADS.

OR TAILS?
 
uh yea, that's the only thing i wasn't clear about during the game.

Songbird was inspired by the bigdaddies like the handy-men. Fink and his brother were stealing tech and music through tears, especially from rapture.

I also like to think that the Songbird is part human as well and is controlled by another alternate Booker. (This of course is completely unfounded).
 
Songbird was inspired by the bigdaddies like the handy-men. Fink and his brother were stealing tech and music through tears, especially from rapture.

I also like to think that the Songbird is part human as well and is controlled by another alternate Booker. (This of course is completely unfounded).

yea, i was thinking "is he an alt Booker in there?" during the game. curious if people will figure that part out from game information.
 
- Columbia would have had to have existed as a regular town that later got elevated, otherwise the 1880 date for the ice delivery makes no sense. DeWitt wouldn't have been reborn into Comstock at the age of 6.
Columbia might've been a real town but again, Booker as Comstock aged faster, plus I wouldn't put it past him to kill anyone who would contradict his origin story as a simple farmer who was visited by an archangel.

- The Boxer Rebellion really doesn't fit into the chronology well, will need to get back to the Hall of Heroes to see what the deal was.
DeWitt wasn't there, but Slate was. That's all. Comstock/Columbia was there to intercede/intervene which is why it seceded from the US. Hall of Heroes is a Comstock family circlejerk -> Wounded Knee is where he became a hero and what Columbia did during the Boxer Rebellion was how Columbia rose above the US and became something greater. And the Hall of the Lady Comstock to commemorate her martyrdom.

- I still don't know what to make of the map of the US that's in the (first) lighthouse, with pushpins in a bunch of cities and the note "Be Prepared. He's on his way. You must stop him. -C"
Beside that map is a schedule of where Columbia 'docks' (for the lack of a better term) for supplies or something I believe.
 
also i'll say this:

hated that "city at the bottom of the ocean? ridiculous" line

it didnt down right ruin the experience or anything but I mean yeah we already got it, it wasn't the time to make a joke like that IMO.

specially when the guy spent the whole game in a city at the top of the ski ffs, lol
 
That would be brilliant. Imagine if Irrational use the DLC's to explain the game fully, or at least flesh it out.

Just give me more columbia to explore and I'm there!
Technically I already am since I bought the season pass, BOOM!

Is there a significant catchphrase/line in this game that it will be remembered by?

#TeamDIMWITT

"Elizabeth Are you afraid of God? No, I'm afraid of you."
 
also i'll say this:

hated that "city at the bottom of the ocean? ridiculous" line

it didnt down right ruin the experience or anything but I mean yeah we already got it, it wasn't the time to make a joke like that IMO.

specially when the game spent the whole game in a city at the top of the ski ffs

Wonder if him saying that has any significance...a city in the sky vs. the ocean are both incredible feats, how could one be accustom to one yet discredit the other?
 
You guys remember those two demos that didn't reflect what was in the final game? Remember how the end of the actual game featured one of the old Elizabeth designs that was in the first demo?

It was an alternate reality, Booker potentially dies at the end of the first demo, meaning it's a failed attempt at destroying Comstock.

Levine is doing some Kojima style shit here.
 
also i'll say this:

hated that "city at the bottom of the ocean? ridiculous" line

it didnt down right ruin the experience or anything but I mean yeah we already got it, it wasn't the time to make a joke like that IMO.

specially when the guy spent the whole game in a city at the top of the ski ffs, lol

You have to understand though. In his universe, in the Chicago World Fair of 1893, they created this magnificent floating city.

It became a constant for them. It's like if we had a floating city in our day and age. It's normal for us, nothing strange.

Now imagine if all of sudden you discovered a city the size of New York submerged under the water?

You would react the same as Booker, thinking it was ridiculous no doubt.
 
also i'll say this:

hated that "city at the bottom of the ocean? ridiculous" line

it didnt down right ruin the experience or anything but I mean yeah we already got it, it wasn't the time to make a joke like that IMO.

specially when the guy spent the whole game in a city at the top of the ski ffs, lol
Agreed, although I have a feeling he was being sarcastic.
 
Wonder if him saying that has any significance...a city in the sky vs. the ocean are both incredible feats, how could one be accustom to one yet discredit the other?

These damn kids today with their ridiculous water cities!

Whats wrong with a sky city? Back in '12 we were damn happy to float around and get wet from rain like god intended!

Dont get me started on Jazz music and big bands!
 
You have to understand though. In his universe, in the Chicago World Fair of 1893, they created this magnificent floating city.

It became a constant for them. It's like if we had a floating city in our day and age. It's normal for us, nothing strange.

Now imagine if all of sudden you discovered a city the size of New York submerged under the water?

You would react the same as Booker, thinking it was ridiculous no doubt.

I agree with you, only because I watched and read all this stuff before the games release.
 
You have to understand though. In his universe, in the Chicago World Fair of 1893, they created this magnificent floating city.

It became a constant for them. It's like if we had a floating city in our day and age. It's normal for us, nothing strange.

Now imagine if all of sudden you discovered a city the size of New York submerged under the water?

You would react the same as Booker, thinking it was ridiculous no doubt.

Actually, Booker didn't see the floating city be made in his reality so it should be equally ridiculous. I still liked the line though.
 
Was it all a dream?
No, all the events occurred. Not sure where you came up with the theory it was just a dream from?Did the end actually occur? Lake scene etc? What was that Lake scene referencing? Who is Elizabeth? Who is Booker? Chronologically, what happened as far as the plotline of the game? I really don't understand why Booker does what the things he does throughout and how he knows certain things without the player knowing.

I started off this post answering your questions, but then I just realized you should probably replay this game over. Because honestly, I'm not sure if you rushed through the game or what but these questions just seem as if you didn't even play the game :/

An it's all explained to. So don't give me this BS that the game did a horrible job of narrating. You just did a horrible job at paying attention.
 
You have to understand though. In his universe, in the Chicago World Fair of 1893, they created this magnificent floating city.

It became a constant for them. It's like if we had a floating city in our day and age. It's normal for us, nothing strange.

Now imagine if all of sudden you discovered a city the size of New York submerged under the water?

You would react the same as Booker, thinking it was ridiculous no doubt.

Agreed, although I have a feeling he was being sarcastic.

I think you guys are overthinking it, it's just sort of a 4th wall breaking line meant to talk to the player, but it felt out of place at that particular moment
 
I think the speed of the reveal lent itself to the lucidity and dream like quality of the ending. It just ramped up in tension and insanity until the final moment of Booker drowning. It's like a whirlwind of madness leading to the crashing moment of the final piano chord.

I really didn't have a problem with the pacing of the end.
 
I think the speed of the reveal lent itself to the lucidity and dream like quality of the ending. It just ramped up in tension and insanity until the final moment of Booker drowning. It's like a whirlwind of madness leading to the crashing moment of the final piano chord.

I really didn't have a problem with the pacing of the end.

Me neither, I think the whole final hour had ridiculously fast pacing.
 
You guys remember those two demos that didn't reflect what was in the final game? Remember how the end of the actual game featured one of the old Elizabeth designs that was in the first demo?

It was an alternate reality, Booker potentially dies at the end of the first demo, meaning it's a failed attempt at destroying Comstock.

Levine is doing some Kojima style shit here.

Love it. Especially when we see that same Elizabeth model at the end.
 
I think you guys are overthinking it, it's just sort of a 4th wall breaking line meant to talk to the player, but it felt out of place at that particular moment

It's hard not to overthink when this game involves alternate realities, multiple universe, booker being comstock, liz being booker daughter.

Comes with the territory almost.

I think the speed of the reveal lent itself to the lucidity and dream like quality of the ending. It just ramped up in tension and insanity until the final moment of Booker drowning. It's like a whirlwind of madness leading to the crashing moment of the final piano chord.

I really didn't have a problem with the pacing of the end.

Agreed. If the pace was any slower, it would be really hard to get that much more of a impact.

With it's current pace, it was like WATTTTTTT..hold on, hold on, back up here a minute.There was sense of rush with that..it's hard to explain...
 
It's hard not to overthink when this game involves alternate realities, multiple universe, booker being comstock, liz being booker daughter.

Comes with the territory almost.



Agreed. If the pace was any slower, it would be really hard to get that much more of a impact.

With it's current pace, it was like WATTTTTTT..hold on, hold on, back up here a minute.There was sense of rush with that..it's hard to explain...
You had that feeling, like wait was I really just in Rapture? Did that really just happen?

It was brilliant for me.
 
So what was the point of Comstock's death? He didn't really resist Booker at all.

It was to illustrate that Comstock's death meant nothing in the wider context of things and that the real problem lied in the dimensional loop that was created due to his actions beforehand.
 
to create Comstock. he knew what was gonna happen. he even said "It's finished." before he died.

this guy replayed that part and explained it. pretty good explanation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XNJ5MmJRcI

edit: he also showed the images on the walls before you confront Comstock and it already predicted the future. such nice details.

I find that theory a bit confusing though. Isn't the origin of Comstock the baptism that happens way before the events of the game? How does it loop back around with his death?

Or was his criticism of Booker a way to make him and Elizabeth realize what's actually going on?
 
EVERYONE IS BOOKER

150px-SoraKH1design.jpg
 
Just read through this thread, some thoughts.

Old Elizabeth became what Comstock wanted her to become and in 1984 she rains fire upon New York. (Curious as to why it took so long, considering it looked like Comstock was near ready to attack "sodom" already.) Ok so at this point in time as she watches New York burn, she brings Booker to 1984. Why would she do this? The only explanation to me is that the Lutece's at somepoint came to the conclusion that they needed her help to break the cycle repeating over and over. If they went to old Elizabeth (it would have to be after the destruction of sodom was inevitable). and showed her that Booker had tried over and over again to try and save her, but Songbird always stopped him, she could realise how huge a mistake she had made giving up hope.

In the Bioshock universe not every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Some actions never change (coin flip), some actions do change but have no real consequence (the necklace), some actions are cosmic anomolies where universes converge and then branch off from (the baptism). It may have taken the Lutece's a very long time just to figure out the branching out point, let alone trying to stop it.

Slate's fate becomes rather ironic when you look back, he sees DeWitt as a hero, Comstock as dictator. He wants DeWitt the hero to kill him, but either way it's the same man killing him.

How the hell did Comstock get rich? In his version he was a farmer, which is probably a lie, merely suiting the prophet narrative. Curious as to where his money came from and how he met Lutece.

Oh and if you take the end of credit scene as our Booker + Anna. Then by killing himself, Booker stopped himself becoming Comstock, thus stopping himself selling Anna to himself, thus never having to kill himself. Which is the exact same explanation to Red Dwarf series 7.

Whatever happened to the Wild West bounty hunter? The one hired to hunt Daisy? Last I remember hearing on the Voxophone, he began to sympathise for the kid he had wounded, and vowed to take down Comstock himself? Did I miss something, cause they were building him up to make an appearance.

Possible DLC side story?

I was curious about this as well. He goes from being a hired gun of Comstock to being a Vox sympathsizer (with an adopted Indian kid). He's a pretty nasty piece of work too, similar to Booker, who tries to find redemption.
 
You had that feeling, like wait was I really just in Rapture? Did that really just happen?

It was brilliant for me.

That whole section was perfect for me.

I was fixated on the death of the songbird, and even though I wanted that death, I couldn't help but feel sad.

Then, as he drifted away, I started to become aware of my surroundings.

And then my jaw utterly dropped.
 
I find that theory a bit confusing though. Isn't the origin of Comstock the baptism that happens way before the events of the game? How does it loop back around with his death?

Or was his criticism of Booker a way to make him and Elizabeth realize what's actually going on?

It's the point at which Elizabeth realises what's going on because of the nosebleed, but Booker is still repressing it. As for the idea of Comstock knowing that he's leading Booker onto the path of becoming him, I don't buy it. What happens after Comstock is killed doesn't lead to the baptism, but rather to the destruction of Comstock's existence.

It just doesn't fit into place.
 
I find that theory a bit confusing though. Isn't the origin of Comstock the baptism that happens way before the events of the game? How does it loop back around with his death?

Or was his criticism of Booker a way to make him and Elizabeth realize what's actually going on?

yea, from what i gather in those videos, Comstock may have been able to accurately see the futures as well thanks to the Luteces who were helping him for some reason. i still don't understand why the Luteces helped him tho.

It's the point at which Elizabeth realises what's going on because of the nosebleed, but Booker is still repressing it. As for the idea of Comstock knowing that he's leading Booker onto the path of becoming him, I don't buy it. What happens after Comstock is killed doesn't lead to the baptism, but rather to the destruction of Comstock's existence.

It just doesn't fit into place.

dat paradox (sorry, i dunno if that term actually applies to this)
 
Top Bottom