SPOILER Bioshock Infinite SPOILER discussion

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 guess the question is what is the turning point where no previous version of Booker made it to. I'd assume it's before the part where he kills Comstock.

Maybe "It is finished" references to the loop being finished. Maybe the Prophet foresaw all of this.

This could fit. Maybe Comstock had a moment of redemption in the end or something but finally choosing to die.
 
I just thought, "It is finished" was an appropriate final line for super religious arrogant Jesus freak kinda antagonist.

I also like that he drowned him.
 
Maybe "It is finished" references to the loop being finished. Maybe the Prophet foresaw all of this.

This sounds like the most plausible thing regarding that line.

I'm going to set up another playthrough later on and start throwing up some observations as I go. Hopefully I'll get something interesting about it.
 
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.



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

He paid them.
 
Comstock knew he was going to die, but I suspect he didn't know exactly how. It's possible that he saw various versions of his death via Booker, via cancer or something else.
 
Maybe "It is finished" references to the loop being finished. Maybe the Prophet foresaw all of this.

163


Damn. Great point, can't believe I didn't catch onto that.

Someone in this thread is going to be really delighted to hear that ;)
 
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.

Comstock did gain some info from the tears, it's how he was able to get the information about the 'prophecies'. He didn't get all of the information though, just took what he thought he needed, which is why he believed all of his prophecies would come true.

The female Lutece helped Comstock in order to be able to upgrade her tear viewer to a tear creator, in order to bring her brother/male clone over to her universe.

Her brother realizes how 'evil' Comstock is, and convinces her to bring Booker back in to stop Comstock's manipulations.

At some point, Comstock blows up Lutece's time machine while they are 'in' it, in order to make sure they edit: CAN'T rebel against him, supposedly killing them. But it seems more likely that throwing them into the time stream, which is how they are able to keep tabs on all of the Bookers' progress and appear/disappear seemingly at will.
 
Comstock did gain some info from the tears, it's how he was able to get the information about the 'prophecies'. He didn't get all of the information though, just took what he thought he needed, which is why he believed all of his prophecies would come true.

The female Lutece helped Comstock in order to be able to upgrade her tear viewer to a tear creator, in order to bring her brother/male clone over to her universe.

Her brother realizes how 'evil' Comstock is, and convinces her to bring Booker back in to stop Comstock's manipulations.

At some point, Comstock blows up Lutece's time machine while they are 'in' it, in order to make sure they rebel against him, supposedly killing them. But it seems more likely that throwing them into the time stream, which is how they are able to keep tabs on all of the Bookers' progress and appear/disappear seemingly at will.

damn, thanks. that clears things up.
 
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?

Ya the way that guy saw the endings was completely wrong, or else he is explaining it in a strange way.
 
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.

This one actually confused me more...

I am not quite following how killing Comstock creates him? I was under the assumption that the baptism is what split Booker/Comstock.
 
I think the most important line during the drowning baptism is that Booker mentions that they were just there and Elizabeth says that it is a different place. Thus there are two baptisms, Booker prime's one that they had just visited and Comstock prime's which is where they are when the drowning takes place. This fits with the heads vs tails, and the bird vs cage thing, two events that are linked but different. Thus when he drowns in what was to become Comstock prime's baptism Comstock will not exist in any universe from that point, where as the Booker timeline will continue since it was a different place, as evidenced by Elizabeth's line about a different location. I think this probably could have been handled better by having player Booker drown pre-Comstock booker instead of Elizabeth doing it. Because Comstock never exists, Anna is never taken so that is why you have the post credit scene.
 
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?
I'm not on board with that theory either. This guys videos have been good other than that. But that makes zero sense to me. How would Booker return from all this and then somehow end up turning in to Comstock in another loop? Regardless, we know he doesn't because we see him get drowned.
 
This one actually confused me more...

I am not quite following how killing Comstock creates him? I was under the assumption that the baptism is what split Booker/Comstock.

to me, it was just one of many timelines he predicted would come true.

but you have a point. you guys should post comments so he will make an updated theory.
 
This one actually confused me more...

I am not quite following how killing Comstock creates him? I was under the assumption that the baptism is what split Booker/Comstock.

Yeah I have a feeling that guy is reading into that scene wrong. The more I think about it, it seems like Comstock's death was similar to Ryan's in B1. He was trying to make a point and the only was with his death.

BTW did they explain what was on the note? I'm guessing Elizabeth was telling herself to use Songbird to destroy the siphon instead of having Booker fight him (since he always loses).
 
Has nobody pointed out that Comstock had a literal roadmap to the different dimensions in his bedroom onboard the airship?

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.



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.

Forming a cult around yourself makes you wealthy. Look at Scientology
 
Forming a cult around yourself makes you wealthy. Look at Scientology

True, makes it all the more curious as to how he teamed up with Lutece. Although an arrangement between them would be mutually beneficial, how would they have discovered eachother? I believe it also mentioned that he got government funding too, so he may not have been super weathy.
 
I also chose bird. It just created the illusion of choice, that we can choose our own path as Booker DeWitt but in the end we were just a pawn in the Luteces' plans.

Both the cage and the bird are the same in a way. Elizabeth was confined both by the cage that she was restricted to, and the bird (Songbird) that restricted her. They were both means of confinement.
 
to me, it was just one of many timelines he predicted would come true.

but you have a point. you guys should post comments so he will make an updated theory.

Speaking of updated theory.

Can a mod fucking delete like the first few pages, and replace it with some official theories (and maybe a few videos and charts if someone wants to come up with one) instead of what we have now?

Just saying, because some new people who finished the game might want to know whats up, and it's hard to digest whats happening just going from post to post..especially if you felt lost.
 
So why did Elizabeth code the note to herself instead of just, you know, writing it in plain engrish?

I guess it was in a code that only she would know. We know she did a lot of stuff with codes, was observed doing it too, not outside the realm of possibility that she came up with her own code, that only she can read. That would be proof that it was from her future self.
 
Yeah I have a feeling that guy is reading into that scene wrong. The more I think about it, it seems like Comstock's death was similar to Ryan's in B1. He was trying to make a point and the only was with his death.

BTW did they explain what was on the note? I'm guessing Elizabeth was telling herself to use Songbird to destroy the siphon instead of having Booker fight him (since he always loses).

to me, it was just one of many timelines he predicted would come true.

but you have a point. you guys should post comments so he will make an updated theory.

Yea I'm convinced he's reading that scene wrong. He's commenting heavily on the "self-criticism" of Booker towards Comstock and I think mistook this as evidence that Booker becomes Comstock through his self-loathing or something. As Elizabeth said, there are an 'infinite' amount of Comstock's, only killing the Prophet won't change anything.

The video did show me some things I totally missed. Like how the NYC bombardment scene takes place in 1983. Shit I can't believe I missed that.
 
Yea I'm convinced he's reading that scene wrong. He's commenting heavily on the "self-criticism" of Booker towards Comstock and I think mistook this as evidence that Booker becomes Comstock through his self-loathing or something. As Elizabeth said, there are an 'infinite' amount of Comstock's, only killing the Prophet won't change anything.

The video did show me some things I totally missed. Like how the NYC bombardment scene takes place in 1983. Shit I can't believe I missed that.

ah yea, i saw the 1984 car billboard there. pretty cool and creepy.
 
The video did show me some things I totally missed. Like how the NYC bombardment scene takes place in 1983. Shit I can't believe I missed that.


Okay...

WHAT

THE

FUCK.

Damn..there are so many little things in Infinite that I feel like I missed.

Fuck, you could do a whole fucking literarry analysis on this fucking game. Man, O man. Fucking blows my mind that was '83 NYC.
 
I just finished; consider me mindfucked. I liked the Rapture cameo and maybe it's just me, but I liked the idea of Rapture in the context of her being kind of...mmm...outside the mortal coil? It's like she died and got "raptured". I usually hate time travel/universe travel due to the plot holes that it inevitably causes, but I liked the way it was used here.

I figured the solution to the problem was going to be Elizabeth killing herself, but I never figured that she'd kill herself by killing her Dad Booker at the moment he got reborn as Comstock, who needed a daughter from Booker because Elizabeth made him sterile, but she's his daughter....

X_X

Like I said, time/universe skipping causes too many holes to reconcile, but I'm not letting it bother me. The only part that doesn't totally make sense (that I can think of right now) is Slate (I think was his name...) being a contemporary of Booker's during the war, but somehow he doesn't realize that Booker has shown up as a much younger version of himself?
 
Okay...

WHAT

THE

FUCK.

Damn..there are so many little things in Infinite that I feel like I missed.

Fuck, you could do a whole fucking literarry analysis on this fucking game. Man, O man. Fucking blows my mind that was '83 NYC.

Yea, there's even a Stock ticker for Fink MFG...
 
Just finished and left with this thought "This game should be taught in high school."

A truly fantastic game. Reveled in every Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead moment.
 
Top Bottom