Support NeoGAF

[Salsa]

And what is this reason for the similarities?

none? other than "woah that's cool!"

it's science fiction. The themes of the story have many metaphors and visions that apply to modern culture and human society in general, but there doesnt have to be a reason for everything.

Bioshock just takes place in a world where the same exact story is being continuously told in an infinite (wink) number of different universes. Only with different contexts.

I mean sure, it also works as fan service to take you there, but it also helps in showing what Elizabeth means by "another city, another man". The trip to Rapture is meant to give you another chance to go "ohhh" in case you didnt get it at first. There's nothing IN there that shows you this but the trip alone is intended to make you think of the game.

And the similarities are not just similarities for the sake of it, it is very clear that this is the absolute intention.

Not only by Elizabeth's line, but you can do a silly run down on each universe's equivalents:



Rapture = Columbia

both meant to be an "ark" of sorts for what their leader considers the elite of humanity, meant to live outside of plebe society for one rason or the other

Andrew Ryan = Comstock

both leaders driven mad by their ambitions above

Big Daddy = Songbird

both mutant creatures meant to take care of an asset that is integral to the success of the ark

Little Sisters = Elizabeth

the assets that need protection. Both successfully "rebel" in the end (remember: the little sisters are the one that ultimately kill Fontaine, same way Elizabeth is the one who kills booker/comstock here)

Frank Fontaine/Atlas = Daisy Fitzroy

people who raise up to challenge the established society but are revealed to corrupt themselves or have a much deeper and darker meaning behind their actions that relate them more to the person they oppress

Brigid Tenenbaum = Lutece twins

Scientists working for the leader who develop technologies that are crucial to achieve the society's goal. Both end up rebeling and aiding the player throughout the journey.



it is absolutely in your face throughout the game mayne

 

[-COOLIO-]

So somebody pointed this out earlier, about how the "decisions" you make during the game actually have no bearing on what happens at all - they're purely cosmetic, the reason being that the devs are making a statement that some decisions have no discernable impact on any mulitverse. Following this line of thought, perhaps Booker never made a decision pre-Wounded Knee that would have made a discernable impact in any multiverse. Sure, maybe in some multiverse he eats corndogs instead of fried chicken - but nothing else changes. I think that's the idea they're trying to communicate with the locket/coin toss stuff. Or at least that's somebody else's idea I stole and hamfisted into my own theory.

so there's an infinite number of bookers prebaptism, but they somehow congeal into a single universe where he's killed in all of them?

 

[Grief.exe]

then there must be an infinite number of ways that booker accepts the baptism OR there is an infinite number of bookers that decided not to go the baptism meeting.

Ya and those Bookers have no impact on the universe.

I have a feeling that if Booker ended up fighting in Wounded Knee and if he survived, every single Booker in the multiverse would end up seeking Baptism for cleansing his sins.

And where it diverts there is where Booker changes to Comstock.

 

[antitrop]

Just finished the game. Blown away. Amazing.

By and by, Lord, by and by
There's a better home a-waiting
In the sky, Lord, in the sky

 

[-COOLIO-]

Exactly, at every point in time a new subset of universes is created, each containing every possible divergent chain of events. The concept of Booker "reviving" from death throughout the game is another demonstration of this. In one set of universes, one Booker dies to a Handyman or whatever; in another set, he dodges and kills the Handyman and moves on to the next level. We keep following the divergent universes where he survives to the end.



There's three sets: 1) Booker never goes to the meeting, 2) Booker accepts the baptism, 3) Booker rejects the baptism. At the end of the game, 2 and 3 get eliminated.

see, i don't understand then, why you wouldn't just kill the 2s.

 

[CuckFupertino]

so there's an infinite number of bookers prebaptism, but they somehow congeal into a single universe where he's killed in all of them?

Maybe all Bookers end up at the baptism. Or maybe it's only the Bookers who end up at the baptism that need to die.

We're bound to end up in some sort of discussion about determinism and free will, if this keeps going the way it is... But this again goes back to the idea that some things are constant and others variable. Constant = Booker goes to the baptism. Variable = Booker becomes Comstock, or he walks away.

Just like in the game. Constants are Elizabeth wears a choker, variables are whether or not the choker has a cage or a bird. In the case of those variables, there is no discernable impact on any multiverse. It's interesting if you think of your own game as an instance of reality, and my game as an instance (whoa that's meta). i.e. you pick the cage, so you get a multiverse with the cage. I picked the bird, so I got a multiverse with the bird. Unfortunately there's no real difference in either case. The player gets some "agency," but it turns out not to mean a damn thing in the end (unless you were really concerned about her choker).

Am I making sense? I fear I may not be.

 

[Remachinate]

see, i don't understand then, why you wouldn't just kill the 2s.

You're right, it would have been more merciful to the "good" Booker to drown Comstock after he emerges from being baptized by the priest rather than before, thereby only removing only (2). The best theory I can present is that Elizabeth needed Booker to be willing to die; a Comstock accepting baptism wouldn't allow himself to be overpowered and killed by 20 year-old girls. Also it wouldn't have made for as revelatory an ending.

 

[Jackl]

Completely changes the entire game lol
Imagine if there was a DLC that altered small parts here and there throughout the game that ultimately completely changed something at the very end.

I'd buy it. I know it's shameless, and reinforcing bad dev bahvoir.

But what if you accepted Fink's proposal? What if the locket had meaningful consequences? What if you just said fuck this shit lets go to Paris? What if you shot daisy in the face to begin with?


Mind blown. Possibilities endless.

Take2 My Money2

 

[-COOLIO-]

Ya and those Bookers have no impact on the universe.

I have a feeling that if Booker ended up fighting in Wounded Knee and if he survived, every single Booker in the multiverse would end up seeking Baptism for cleansing his sins.

And where it diverts there is where Booker changes to Comstock.

that still means the liz would have to travel to an infinite number of universes to kill an infinite number of bookers.

i think i've finally compiled my thoughts well enough to clearly present my issue with a multi verse pre baptism:

unless all these universes somehow meld back to each other, you have to do an infinite amount of booker killing.

 

[Alucrid]

I bet Ken Levine is somewhere reading this laughing at our futile attempts.

 

[Grief.exe]

see, i don't understand then, why you wouldn't just kill the 2s.

We don't really know for sure.

Do you think that every Booker was killed before the baptism?
That would be supported by all of the Elizabeths winking out of existence since the Booker that rejected the baptism is dead and can't conceive her.

Do you think that only the Booker that accepted the baptism was killed?
It could be argued that this is the case, referencing the scene after the credits. That, in no way, is definitive though.

Really neither are definitive since you don't see the last Elizabeth wink out, there is that note but we don't see it actually happen.

 

[MaximumFlipFlop]

Regardless of how much I loved the story, going back through is just as tedious as I thought it would be. Looting is an absolute bore and gameplay still feels kinda meh. I have to be honest though, that first playthrough was almost worth the $60 price of admission on PSN. Glad I took my time with it.

 

[rinker]

none? other than "woah that's cool!"

I was refering to when you said that you realized that the similarities are there for a reason - anyway, I shouldn't take you so literally when we are talking about metaphors. Nice chat!

 

[-COOLIO-]

Maybe all Bookers end up at the baptism. Or maybe it's only the Bookers who end up at the baptism that need to die.

We're bound to end up in some sort of discussion about determinism and free will, if this keeps going the way it is... But this again goes back to the idea that some things are constant and others variable. Constant = Booker goes to the baptism. Variable = Booker becomes Comstock, or he walks away.

Just like in the game. Constants are Elizabeth wears a choker, variables are whether or not the choker has a cage or a bird. In the case of those variables, there is no discernable impact on any multiverse. It's interesting if you think of your own game as an instance of reality, and my game as an instance (whoa that's meta). i.e. you pick the cage, so you get a multiverse with the cage. I picked the bird, so I got a multiverse with the bird. Unfortunately there's no real difference in either case. The player gets some "agency," but it turns out not to mean a damn thing in the end (unless you were really concerned about her choker).

Am I making sense? I fear I may not be.

i hear you, but no matter what, for the act of actually murdering booker, you would have to kill an infinite amount of bookers, even if all the universes end up in the same place.

 

[Grief.exe]

Regardless of how much I loved the story, going back through is just as tedious as I thought it would be. Looting is an absolute bore and gameplay still feels kinda meh. I have to be honest though, that first playthrough was almost worth the $60 price of admission on PSN. Glad I took my time with it.

I'm kind of afraid of this.

 

[Salsa]

I was refering to when you said that you realized that the similarities are there for a reason

I meant that the reason exists purely to emphasize the point that it's an ongoing cycle that continues to go round and round infinitely

as for the reason for that cycle? it's never explained! and I guess we'll never know and that's totally fine.

and yeah, theorizing about this game is really fun

 

[Inferno313]

I really liked the guitar moment. But I kind of wished they had gone through the whole song. I know that's on the soundtrack, but was that anywhere in the game aside from the behind the scenes clip?

 

[-COOLIO-]

We don't really know for sure.

Do you think that every Booker was killed before the baptism?
That would be supported by all of the Elizabeths winking out of existence since the Booker that rejected the baptism is dead and can't conceive her.

Do you think that only the Booker that accepted the baptism was killed?
It could be argued that this is the case, referencing the scene after the credits. That, in no way, is definitive though.

Really neither are definitive since you don't see the last Elizabeth wink out, there is that note but we don't see it actually happen.

i do think only the 2s were killed, which is why we got that post credits scene. it's the only way the story even works in my mind.

 

[Alucrid]

I really liked the guitar moment. But I kind of wished they had gone through the whole song. I know that's on the soundtrack, but was that anywhere in the game aside from the behind the scenes clip?

I mean, it's the song at the beginning of Columbia (post rocket pod) as well, just a choir singing it.

 

[Ceebs]

On a second playthrough now and knowing how it all turns out there are an absolute ton of clues and hints as to what is really going on. Really like how Elizabeth is humming the gospel tune in your office right after you get her out of the tower.

This may be stretching it just a bit, but the kinda creepy distorted music in the office at other times sounds very much like a lullaby.

 

[Salsa]

I really liked the guitar moment. But I kind of wished they had gone through the whole song. I know that's on the soundtrack, but was that anywhere in the game aside from the behind the scenes clip?

song is heard in the distance during the ending lighthouses section. Not sure if it's Elizabeth's rendition but it'd only make sense

 

[Grief.exe]

i hear you, but no matter what, for the act of actually murdering booker, you would have to kill an infinite amount of bookers, even if all the universes end up in the same place.

If you hear him then think about it this way.

She changed the constant for every multiverse in existance.

So instead of the constant being Booker goes to the baptism.

The constant for every universe now is, Booker dies at the baptism.

i do think only the 2s were killed, which is why we got that post credits scene. it's the only way the story even works in my mind.

Neither way is definitive right now, it really does work both ways. You just haven't wrapped your head around it yet.

 

[Inferno313]

I mean, it's the song at the beginning of Columbia as well, just a choir singing it.

Yeah, I know. But on the soundtrack there's a full four minute version of Troy Baker and Courtnee Draper singing it. I was wondering if that made it into the game in any capacity.

 

[Alucrid]

Yeah, I know. But on the soundtrack there's a full four minute version of Troy Baker and Courtnee Draper singing it. I was wondering if that made it into the game in any capacity.

Oh, I don't think so.

If you hear him then think about it this way.

She changed the constant for every multiverse in existance.

So instead of the constant being Booker goes to the baptism.

The constant for every universe now is, Booker dies at the baptism.



Neither way is definitive right now, it really does both ways. You just haven't wrapped your head around it yet.

Wait, but in order for dying at the baptism to be a constant going to it in the first place has to be as well, right? So it's not changing constants it's adding a point of constancy along the time line?

 

[Salsa]

This may be stretching it just a bit, but the kinda creepy distorted music in the office at other times sounds very much like a lullaby.

stick to the door; there's very subtle baby cries

 

[EatChildren]

Booker = Comstock wasn't so much predictable as a really obvious narrative trapping for a game like this. As soon as multi-dimensional quantum shifts were introduced it was the first place my mind went. The hero is the bad guy too because that's the way these stories have a tendency to be written.

Thankfully it all comes together in a way that makes it interesting, and not lazy.

 

[Voice of Reason]

then there must be an infinite number of ways that booker accepts the baptism OR there is an infinite number of bookers that decided not to go the baptism meeting.

It doesn't matter how many ways he accepts, because that Booker is killed before making any of those decisions.

 

[-COOLIO-]

On a second playthrough now and knowing how it all turns out there are an absolute ton of clues and hints as to what is really going on. Really like how Elizabeth is humming the gospel tune in your office right after you get her out of the tower.

This may be stretching it just a bit, but the kinda creepy distorted music in the office at other times sounds very much like a lullaby.

it's ridiculous how many. if you stand next to the lucetes after the heads/tails thing she says some funny stuff.

 

[CuckFupertino]

that still means the liz would have to travel to an infinite number of universes to kill an infinite number of bookers.

i think i've finally compiled my thoughts well enough to clearly present my issue with a multi verse pre baptism:

unless all these universes somehow meld back to each other, you have to do an infinite amount of booker killing.

It makes sense. But if that's the case, we have to regard some stuff as "trivial" and some stuff as important.

For the universes to meld back together, they'd have to be identical. When a multiverse is identical to another multiverse, it is not an identical copy - they "meld" together. It's like a logical identity. If C = A, and B = A, then C = B. You can call them C and B, but they're the same thing. So maybe it's like this: There are infinite multiverses pre-baptism. Maybe in one multiverse Booker eats eggs for breakfast on May 27th, 1888. Maybe in another he had oatmeal. Like in the game, maybe Elizabeth wore a choker with a bird; maybe she didn't. In the end it didn't matter. That stuff is so insignificant, so trivial, it simply doesn't matter. It has no effect on the identity of the multiverse. Call egg multiverse B, call oatmeal multiverse C. They still both equal A. Therefore they're the same multiverse. I know that's a lot to wrap my head around, but this would explain "convergence." Hence if you kill the one, "converged" Booker at the baptism, you're not just killing eggs-for-breakfast-Booker and letting oatmeal-for-breakfast get away. You're killing them all, because they're identical.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5d0CA_Eapc

This shit is amazing.

No joke.

 

[Salsa]

Booker = Comstock wasn't so much predictable as a really obvious narrative trapping for a game like this. As soon as multi-dimensional quantum shifts were introduced it was the first place my mind went. The hero is the bad guy too because that's the way these stories have a tendency to be written.

Thankfully it all comes together in a way that makes it interesting, and not lazy.

yup. Post from a few pages back:

what's funny is that the twist is one of those that you could easily just throw as a wild guess and be right because the "everyone's related" thing tends to happen so much in stories

"I bet he and the bad guy are the same guy!" "I bet she's his daughter!"

but it's handled in a way here that makes it work and still surprise you

 

[toastyToast]

see, i don't understand then, why you wouldn't just kill the 2s.

Unless there is a way to assassinate the Booker that gets baptised every time, there is no succinct method to stop Comstock being birthed.

 

[-COOLIO-]

It doesn't matter how many ways he accepts, because that Booker is killed before making any of those decisions.

according to you there's an infinite number of bookers that are making those decisions.

 

[Grief.exe]

It makes sense. But if that's the case, we have to regard some stuff as "trivial" and some stuff as important.

For the universes to meld back together, they'd have to be identical. When a multiverse is identical to another multiverse, it is not an identical copy - they "meld" together. It's like a logical identity. If C = A, and B = A, then C = B. You can call them C and B, but they're the same thing. So maybe it's like this: There are infinite multiverses pre-baptism. Maybe in one multiverse Booker eats eggs for breakfast on May 27th, 1888. Maybe in another he had oatmeal. Like in the game, maybe Elizabeth wore a choker with a bird; maybe she didn't. In the end it didn't matter. That stuff is so insignificant, so trivial, it simply doesn't matter. It has no effect on the identity of the multiverse. Call egg multiverse B, call oatmeal multiverse C. They still both equal A. Therefore they're the same multiverse. I know that's a lot to wrap my head around, but this would explain "convergence." Hence if you kill the one, "converged" Booker at the baptism, you're not just killing eggs-for-breakfast-Booker and letting oatmeal-for-breakfast get away. You're killing them all, because they're identical.

Elizabeth did keep saying at the end, infinite variables, always the same ending.

 

[Gorillaz]

Booker = Comstock wasn't so much predictable as a really obvious narrative trapping for a game like this. As soon as multi-dimensional quantum shifts were introduced it was the first place my mind went. The hero is the bad guy too because that's the way these stories have a tendency to be written.

Thankfully it all comes together in a way that makes it interesting, and not lazy.

Yea that literally was the one twist I had going on in my mind about halfway through. Just due to the lack of true background on Comstock.

Being the father of elizabeth was something that I wondered but shrugged off early, like alot of other crazy theories.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Booker = Comstock wasn't so much predictable as a really obvious narrative trapping for a game like this. As soon as multi-dimensional quantum shifts were introduced it was the first place my mind went. The hero is the bad guy too because that's the way these stories have a tendency to be written.

Thankfully it all comes together in a way that makes it interesting, and not lazy.

I had it spoiled for me before playing it that they were the same guy and Liz was his daughter but I think I would have sense it a bit in game anyway, or maybe I give myself too much credit. But I was still astounded by how it actually got to that point. It was very well done and it worked well I think. Some of it was a bit too "It just is" but overall my Jaw hit the floor a few times

 

[Inferno313]

Also, holy shit, maybe I'm stupid. But it just dawned on me how well "Will The Circle Be Unbroken" fits thematically, now that I've beaten the game.

 

[Voice of Reason]

according to you there's an infinite number of bookers that are making those decisions.

And there is. All infinite variations are symbolized by bringing Elizabeths from each variation (obviously couldn't fit an insane amount of Elizabeths on screen, but they would.) All those Elizabeths that randomly pop up symbolize that the timeline they're in will affect everything proceeding it, no matter how different each timeline will be. All infinite variations are eliminated, by being shown in one timeline.

 

[antitrop]

Booker = Comstock wasn't so much predictable as a really obvious narrative trapping for a game like this. As soon as multi-dimensional quantum shifts were introduced it was the first place my mind went. The hero is the bad guy too because that's the way these stories have a tendency to be written.

Thankfully it all comes together in a way that makes it interesting, and not lazy.

After going back to Rapture, Booker could have fought a giant purple dinosaur for the end and I would have been happy.

I find myself entertaining ideas of alternate endings where Booker and Elizabeth are not related and they live out the rest of their days together in Paris.

 

[mickcenary]

Haha. Lord, I'm an idiot. Just sent my brother a text message to tell him to play this masterpiece...

Me: 'Yo, you should play Bio. String theory, alternate universes... It is the most grand narrative ever. Still mind blown. And it's an amazing game'.

Me: 'Wait. Don't read that!'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'Ff'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'F'

Me: 'D'

Me: 'D'

Me: 'D'

Me: 'Don't read up!'

 

[Alucrid]

Also, holy shit, maybe I'm stupid. But it just dawned on me how well "Will The Circle Be Unbroken" fits thematically, now that I've beaten the game.

Heh yeah, might add to the last scene being either 'heaven' or Booker's last moments.

 

[José Mourinho]

that still means the liz would have to travel to an infinite number of universes to kill an infinite number of bookers.

i think i've finally compiled my thoughts well enough to clearly present my issue with a multi verse pre baptism:

unless all these universes somehow meld back to each other, you have to do an infinite amount of booker killing.

As I understand it, though part of me is sort of with you on this one. The general consensus is that Booker is born, think of this Booker as the root. Ever decision he makes or doesn't make results in a new timeline. So Booker aged 5 eats chicken for dinner, there's that timeline. Booker aged 5 refuses dinner and it splits. There are now two timelines (obviously there would be billions of billions and so on by this time in his life, but for explanation sake). Every decision up to this point and after works the same. So come Baptism the choice is get baptized, become Comstock. Don't, and stay Booker.

After this, every post baptism Booker is on a path to being Comstock. Every tiny event produces another universe with another Comstock who just did something slightly different.

So to kill them all, you really have to go back to that key decision and kill Booker... Or you know, they could of used Bookers own suggestion and sent somebody to strangle baby Booker and sort the whole thing out in five minutes.

Edit: however, my gripe is similar to yours. Presumably many Bookers would of ended up at the baptism, because their choices would of been to insignificant to alter the course. But such is the issue of multiverse if you don't explain the rules of your multiverse. Which has been one of my points all along.

 

[rohlfinator]

so there's an infinite number of bookers prebaptism, but they somehow congeal into a single universe where he's killed in all of them?

I think it's more like:

At the time of the baptism, there have been infinite Bookers, but there's only one relevant "path" where he decided to get baptized. And the game's narrative branches out from that single path into two branches: one where he becomes Comstock, and one where he becomes the Booker that we play as. By killing him at the baptism, all of those branches are eliminated at the root. There are still infinite universes before that where he never went to the baptism in the first place.

...if that makes sense, lol.

 

[Salsa]

Haha. Lord, I'm an idiot. Just sent my brother a text message to tell him to play this masterpiece...

lmao

 

[Grief.exe]

I think it's more like:

At the time of the baptism, there have been infinite Bookers, but there's only one relevant "path" where he decided to get baptized. And the game's narrative branches out from that single path into two branches: one where he becomes Comstock, and one where he becomes the Booker that we play as. By killing him at the baptism, all of those branches are eliminated at the root. There are still infinite universes before that where he never went to the baptism in the first place.

...if that makes sense, lol.

It makes perfect sense, some people just struggle with wrapping their head around this type of stuff.

 

[Alucrid]

As I understand it, though part of me is sort of with you on this one. The general consensus is that Booker is born, think of this Booker as the root. Ever decision he makes or doesn't make results in a new timeline. So Booker aged 5 eats chicken for dinner, there's that timeline. Booker aged 5 refuses dinner and it splits. There are now two timelines (obviously there would be billions of billions and so on by this time in his life, but for explanation sake). Every decision up to this point and after works the same. So come Baptism the choice is get baptized, become Comstock. Don't, and stay Booker.

After this, every post baptism Booker is on a path to being Comstock. Every tiny event produces another universe with another Comstock who just did something slightly different.

So to kill them all, you really have to go back to that key decision and kill Booker... Or you know, they could of used Bookers own suggestion and sent somebody to strangle baby Booker and sort the whole thing out in five minutes.

But couldn't there also be Booker's post Baptism don't turn into Comstock? Yes, that's the event that creates Comstock, but it doesn't mean that it only creates an infinite number of Comstock variations, right?

 

[LiK]

Curious how they'll handle the DLC, did they ever say anything?

They literally gave themselves infinite potential for games and stories. Wonder if they'll try to do one in Rapture.

http://www.oxmonline.com/ken-levine-defends-bioshock-infinite-dlc-announcement

Thursday, Irrational Games announced there would be three post-launch add-ons released for BioShock Infinite, as well as a Season Pass to round them all up. Since BioShock Infinite isn't even out yet, many internet commenters took this announcement as content being taken out of the game to allow parent company Take-Two Interactive to make more money on the same game. According to Irrational's creative director Ken Levine, that's just not the case, and the DLC for Infinite is all-new, and isn't even close to ready.

Levine took to his Twitter to answer questions from fans surrounding the why's and wherefore's of the DLC. Most importantly, Levine wanted to stress the DLC was completely optional, and wouldn't be necessary for the story. He also added that he could understand the potential backlash, saying gamer's have a right to speak with their wallets, however Levine believes in the DLC, going so far as to call it a "love letter to fans." He also emphasized that the newly announced DLC was not indicative of the content cut from the game, and that it was all single-player content.

Downloadable content is a touchy subject for gamers these days, though it's become a fairly common practice for developers to create new content to release post-launch to keep people playing their games. Irrational has a solid track record, and if they want to offer us more Infinite after the game releases, we're all for it. Hopefully the quality will speak for itself, and concerns can be put to rest.

i'm not gonna get it until i know it's good.

 

[Fracas]

Would you guys be interested in ever returning to Columbia for a full game (if it's even possible)?

 

[Salsa]

http://www.oxmonline.com/ken-levine-defends-bioshock-infinite-dlc-announcement



i'm not gonna get it until i know it's good.

love letter to fans + Shawn saying it relates to the original Bioshock

yeah

Would you guys be interested in ever returning to Columbia for a full game (if it's even possible)?

nah

 

[antitrop]

Would you guys be interested in ever returning to Columbia for a full game (if it's even possible)?

I have the season pass, so... No, not really. I feel like they can say everything that needs to be said about the world through DLC.

Bioshock 2 could have been DLC.