Support NeoGAF

[beastmode]

Can someone explain the Rapture connection?

I took it as "these lighthouses are symbolic of universes."

 

[Alienous]

So the Luteces build up to the 77 raffle with the coins? Interesting.

Kind of. They are observing, and editing to help Booker whilst remaining relatively unknown. For instance, they give Booker the shield to help.

There was probably a Booker in the past who picked #77, won the raffle, was surprised, surrounded and killed. This Booker wins the raffle, and reacts in a "of, of course. It had to be #77" fashion. He's more alert when he's surrounded because of the Lutece's vague warning.

 

[kai3345]

The only thing I thought was a little strange was Elizabeth being this naive girl throughout the whole game, but then once the final battle is over she becomes this god basically that knows everything about everything.

 

[PolishQ]

That last drowning scene is supposed to symbolize one amalgamated timeline where an "infinite" amount of Elizabeths drown Booker before Comstock exists.

Voice of Reason
Member
(Today, 02:11 PM)

 

[The One Who Knocks]

ok so there's an infinite number of baptisms then? then how does liz kill an infinite number of bookers when she can't kill a million million comstocks?

She can. Killing an infinite amount of Comstocks doesn't reset the timeline because it means that each Comstock already existed. As Sorian says, she's preventing the probability of him ever existing, and thus preventing the probability of the events of the game ever happening, by drowning an infinite Bookers before the baptism, the earliest place which can lead to Comstock. Elizabeth is a single person at the end, but she has basically became a god, she can alter every timeline as she sees fit at any point. The Luteces' goals are to reset the timeline, and this becomes Elizabeth and Booker's goal, so they eliminate the probability of the events of the game ever occuring by creating a loop in which a specific choice will lead to the events of the game which lead to the choice never happening. So they close off the branches in which Comstock can exist by making it an improbability, because a paradox is not a probability.

EDIT: Exactly what Voice of Reason has stated.

 

[-COOLIO-]

You would think so, but infinity x 2 = infinity.

i think it works out if you think of it in sets. (set1 + set2) - set1 = set 2

And like I said, one Elizabeth can't kill a million million Comstocks. It's only if all of the Elizabeths focus their powers on a single decision point.

so they couldn't focus their attention to the booker than emerges baptised since they can kill an infinite number? or they couldnt focus their powers on an infinite number of decision points? since in your line of thinking, all infinite's equate, even if there's an infinity for every universe amongst infinity.

She can. Killing an infinite amount of Comstocks doesn't reset the timeline because it means that each Comstock already existed. As Sorian says, she's preventing the probability of him ever existing, and thus preventing the probability of the events of the game ever happening, by drowning an infinite Bookers before the baptism, the earliest place which can lead to Comstock. Elizabeth is a single person at the end, but she has basically became a god, she can alter every timeline as she sees fit at any point. The Luteces' goals are to reset the timeline, and this becomes Elizabeth and Booker's goal, so they eliminate the probability of the events of the game ever occuring by creating a loop in which a specific choice will lead to the events of the game which lead to the choice never happening. So they close off the branches in which Comstock can exist by making it an improbability, because a paradox is not a probability.

EDIT: Exactly what Voice of Reason has stated.

for 0.3 seconds if you do it early enough.

 

[Alienous]

The only thing I thought was a little strange was Elizabetha being this naive girl throughout the whole game, but then once the final battle is over she becomes this god basically that knows everything about everything.

If you could see and understand every single potential reality, throughout time and all dimensions, you would become less naïve surely.

 

[ruxtpin]

MGS3 kept data of every soldier you killed, and how, up to a point. It's possible, but how would you check it? The next 'coin-flip' would be 123 at max also.

I'm not sure how the best way to check it would work out, but if the baptism drowning at Columbias entrance is a death, and the Songbird drowning is a death, and any death away from Anna/Liz is a death/restart then the mark for the songbird drowning would be 124 (if you didn't die up until that point), etc. Technically speaking, the game code could track the number of deaths/restarts but it'd be a question of how to best show the updated number to the player (perhaps letting you look at the bell number card in your inventory and showing how the numbers change as you died and restart).

 

[PolishQ]

The only thing I thought was a little strange was Elizabeth being this naive girl throughout the whole game, but then once the final battle is over she becomes this god basically that knows everything about everything.

Because they've just destroyed the siphon machine which was holding back the full extent of her powers.

 

[Alienous]

I'm not sure how the best way to check it would work out, but if the baptism drowning at Columbias entrance is a death, and the Songbird drowning is a death, and any death away from Anna/Liz is a death/restart then the mark for the songbird drowning would be 124 (if you didn't die up until that point), etc. Technically speaking, the game code could track the number of deaths/restarts but it'd be a question of how to best show the updated number to the player (perhaps letting you look at the bell number card in your inventory and showing how the numbers change as you died and restart).

Every time you log it, it would be a vague number.

We know that 122 previous Booker's made it to Battleship Bay. 60 might have made it to Lady Comstock's grave (perhaps another coin flip). My point is that this number doesn't really give much context, as each dead Booker before Battleship Bay doesn't flip a coin. You could only say how many Booker's made it to a point, and you would be that latest Booker to get there.

 

[-COOLIO-]

That last drowning scene is supposed to symbolize one amalgamated timeline where an "infinite" amount of Elizabeths drown Booker before Comstock exists.

i get this, but you might as well kill the infinite comstocks then that emerged from the pool.

 

[The One Who Knocks]

for 0.3 seconds if you do it early enough.

Because as Sorian has said there would be the probability of a Booker later going to be baptised again and the events of the game still occuring. This simply removes the probability of Comstock ever existing by making it impossible for him to exist.

 

[PolishQ]

so they couldn't focus their attention to the booker than emerges baptised since they can kill an infinite number?

I have no problem with this. Elizabeth drowning only the Bookers who accept baptism is a valid interpretation.

 

[-COOLIO-]

True, but to be fair they could track something like that within the game's code (though I'd imagine it would be rather difficult and not be noticed). Be more of a head trip if you could go back and look at the chalk board later in the game and see it updated with added marks based on your progress.

that would be a pretty sweet hint though.

 

[-COOLIO-]

Because as Sorian has said there would be the probability of a Booker later going to be baptised again and the events of the game still occuring. This simply removes the probability of Comstock ever existing by making it impossible for him to exist.

then drown every booker than every emerges from the baptism at any time since you have infinite resources to do it.

 

[-COOLIO-]

I have no problem with this. Elizabeth drowning only the Bookers who accept baptism is a valid interpretation.

oh, then we've already agreed this whole time. we only differ on some branching stuff.

 

[ruxtpin]

Every time you log it, it would be a vague number.

We know that 122 previous Booker's made it to Battleship Bay. 60 might have made it to Lady Comstock's grave (perhaps another coin flip). My point is that this number doesn't really give much context, as each dead Booker before Battleship Bay doesn't flip a coin. You could only say how many Booker's made it to a point, and you would be that latest Booker to get there.

I think I get where you're going when you say the number doesn't give much context, but I'm thinking just in terms of Bookers that the player controls. You start as 122, drowned at the entrance of Colombia and pick up as 123, lets say you die right after the lotto and restart without Liz then you're 124, and then the Songbird drowns you so you're attempt 125 at that point... Etc. Let the player pull out the their bell combo card and see how many alternate Bookers they've had to continue with.

 

[Alienous]

I have no problem with this. Elizabeth drowning only the Bookers who accept baptism is a valid interpretation.

But at this point, why wouldn't Booker (or now Comstock) resist? Before the baptism, Booker decides to remove the choice and die. He realises that it's the only choice he can accept. Otherwise, there would be realities where Comstock resists and others where he is drowned, right?

 

[DerZuhälter]

I think the discussion has shifted toward: Infinity/Infinity=1 and Infinity/Infinity!=1

It's undefined. The ending theory that infinity Liz's could kill infinity Comstock isn't true, it's undefined. Therefore it's an open end, and yet redundant again. It's not even an end. It's a philosophical question about math and omnipotence. Don't break your head about it.
We are dealing with a paradox here.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

then drown every booker than every emerges from the baptism at any time since you have infinite resources to do it.

I think this begins to verge more into "Narrative/Thematic choice" rather than an actual timey-wimey thing. Sure, you could kill him when he emerges, but it doesn't have the same emotional resonance.

 

[-COOLIO-]

I think this begins to verge more into "Narrative/Thematic choice" rather than an actual timey-wimey thing. Sure, you could kill him when he emerges, but it doesn't have the same emotional resonance.

yup, i totally agree this is what it all boils down to:

"before the choice is made" is the best evidence that the artistic intent was to have all bookers killed, but as levine said, "he's a slave to the story" and so am i. the only ending that makes logical sense is the one where the bad bookers are killed, more than anything else because of how the multiverse system has to work.

...

at the end of the day, these are characters are just code, im not too invested in them, im not trying to save bookers life here, but i quite honestly cannot fathom a logical story around all bookers being killed.

edit: also, multiverse stuff aside, there's the fact that we saw liz kill booker in a bad universe and the post credits scene.

 

[Snkfanatic]

So the big "jump" scene where people got spooked was when you turned around and one of those odd shrieking things was standing there? Those things were disturbing in general...surprised they were not in the game more to be honest. Although they were rather easy for me I would just find a corner and light all those little bastards on fire as they came around to get me.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Still manages to make me well up. Such an amazing and beautifully executed scene. Watching it in slo-mo, you can actually make out the resemblance to Booker.

 

[Hypertrooper]

The only thing I thought was a little strange was Elizabeth being this naive girl throughout the whole game, but then once the final battle is over she becomes this god basically that knows everything about everything.

Her personality changed after Comstock started torturing her. I think it is an understandable change because you do not know what he did to her except for a few tidbits.

 

[Sorian]

before we continue i need to know if you're of the mind that there were infinite baptism rejections/acceptances univereses. or just 2 universes for both choices

Sorry I disappeared for a bit. I am of the mind that they wanted to make this as easy as possible for us and that leading up to the baptism there is only one set path and from that baptism there were two possible branches that lead to an infinite amount of possibilities. In the real quantum theory there would have been an infinite number of baptisms and that woulds till work with what I believe the ending was but it seems the writing staff didn't want to deal with that so they wrote it like this.

 

[-COOLIO-]

I think the discussion has shifted toward: Infinity/Infinity=1 and Infinity/Infinity!=1

It's undefined. The ending theory that infinity Liz's could kill infinity Comstock isn't true, it's undefined. Therefore it's an open end, and yet redundant again. It's not even an end. It's a philosophical question about math and omnipotence. Don't break your head about it.
We are dealing with a paradox here.

well put but it's still super fun to talk about.

 

[dark_inferno]

So the big "jump" scene where people got spooked was when you turned around and one of those odd shrieking things was standing there? Those things were disturbing in general...surprised they were not in the game more to be honest. Although they were rather easy for me I would just find a corner and light all those little bastards on fire as they came around to get me.

These were in the future of columbia. Levine did a great job with offering several possible DLCs. Like more of the future with those creepy things. With a more rapture like atmosphere. Or a complete different city. Or a different aspect of the story that only happened in a different universe. Or Bioshock 1.

They should keep the moon for Bioshock 3. And please be Nazi Dinosaurs on the Moon.

 

[-COOLIO-]

Sorry I disappeared for a bit. I am of the mind that they wanted to make this as easy as possible for us and that leading up to the baptism there is only one set path and from that baptism there were two possible branches that lead to an infinite amount of possibilities. In the real quantum theory there would have been an infinite number of baptisms and that woulds till work with what I believe the ending was but it seems the writing staff didn't want to deal with that so they wrote it like this.

i hear you, and that's how i see it too, 2 branches into infinitely many more over time, and not instantaneously. that's why i think liz only went to that first bad split and killed booker there. it would be weird oversight imo to needlessly kill both bookers so that's the ending as i see it. simple as that really.

 

[José Mourinho]

So how does Slate not know Comstock was Booker?

 

[Sorian]

then drown every booker than every emerges from the baptism at any time since you have infinite resources to do it.

If we want to be technical. Everytime we stop a Comstock set from being born, the current Elizabeth we are with would become a different person. She is a god that can affect multiple realities but she is still within the system. If we make it so she isn't the same person then she could lose that god-like ability. Let's say Comstock gets baptised in 1895 (arbitrary date, I just pulled it from my ass) then we get the scene where she loses her pinky. What if we eliminate that set but now there is a Comstock born in 1896. Elizabeth might not lose her pinky in this timeframe a year later and then we can't get the god power. Better to just eliminate it all at once just in case.

 

[Chake]

Can someone explain the letter that booker got at the start of the game? The "Don't pull the 77" Who gave it to him? and why?

So how does Slate not know Comstock was Booker?

The bigger question is: what was he doing in Columbia? How did he even go there?

 

[-COOLIO-]

If we want to be technical. Everytime we stop a Comstock set from being born, the current Elizabeth we are with would become a different person. She is a god that can affect multiple realities but she is still within the system. If we make it so she isn't the same person then she could lose that god-like ability. Let's say Comstock gets baptised in 1895 (arbitrary date, I just pulled it from my ass) then we get the scene where she loses her pinky. What if we eliminate that set but now there is a Comstock born in 1896. Elizabeth might not lose her pinky in this timeframe a year later and then we can't get the god power. Better to just eliminate it all at once just in case.

i dunnnooo, the pinky seems like one of those constants. besides, we know god Elizabeth can see all the doors and travel in time so she probably has her bases covered regardless of what she does. she's dr manhattan.

 

[Alienous]

Can someone explain the letter that booker got at the start of the game? The "Don't pull the 77" Who gave it to him? and why?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=52160919&postcount=5657

The Lutece's gave the telegram, regarding the raffle ball.

 

[Andrew.]

Can someone explain the letter that booker got at the start of the game? The "Don't pull the 77" Who gave it to him? and why?

The Lettuce sister gave it to him so he would be aware shit was gonna hit the fan if he chose that number.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

So how does Slate not know Comstock was Booker?

I thought he did? He kept alluding it throughout his taunting in the museum.

Comstock wasn't there, but you were, etc.

 

[Neiteio]

Still manages to make me well up. Such an amazing and beautifully executed scene. Watching it in slo-mo, you can actually make out the resemblance to Booker.

Yeah, that scene pulled the heartstrings. The other breathtaking bit was the grand reveal at the end of the mental asylum in Comstock House -- elderly Elizabeth razing New York City to the ground, and plainly regretting it. Wow, talk about chills. When she opened a tear and sent me to another reality where that wasn't happening, I felt like how Scrooge must've felt after meeting the Ghost of Christmas Future and waking up in the present the next morning. Utterly relieved -- and all too eager to prevent those horrors from coming to pass.

A question, though: How did Comstock become wealthy? Rosalind Lutece was able to fund her tear machine because of Comstock. But clearly, had Booker not been baptised, he would've wound up in poverty. So what did Comstock do differently that led to wealth? I don't think he became wealthy via the tears, since as I understand it, the tears were created by machines funded by his wealth in the first place. And of course, it'd take tremendous resources to create the floating city of Columbia. So... How?

 

[Sorian]

i dunnnooo, the pinky seems like one of those constants. besides, we know god Elizabeth can see all the doors and travel in time so she probably has her bases covered regardless of what she does. she's dr manhattan.

The only reason I don't see her as completely all-knowing is because I think she can only see what is already there. She can't see the possible reprecussion of what an intervention will do until the intervention has already been done. She can guess, of course, but I don't think she has the "true" all-seeing power.

 

[dark_inferno]

So how does Slate not know Comstock was Booker?

He knew. He knew what Booker did. And he said Comstock claimed everything for himself. And somehow the dialog pointed at Comstock being Booker.

A question, though: How did Comstock become wealthy?

Gambling? That would be funny.

Did they explain why Liz destroyed NY? I thought that maybe she wanted to get back at booker or something.

She lost all hope and trust to all humans because booker never came. So she destroyed NY and maybe the whole world.

 

[Chake]

Did they explain why Liz destroyed NY? I thought that maybe she wanted to get back at booker or something.

 

[The One Who Knocks]

i hear you, and that's how i see it too, 2 branches into infinitely many more over time, and not instantaneously. that's why i think liz only went to that first bad split and killed booker there. it would be weird oversight imo to needlessly kill both bookers so that's the ending as i see it. simple as that really.

Ok, I think we're going to go in infinite circles if we continue so I'll conclude with this post, it would not be an oversight if they murder every Booker before the choice, which Elizabeth states they do (speculation to the contrary directly contradicts what is told in the game) If every Booker is killed by Elizabeth it means that every timeline in which Booker goes to the baptism and accepts is a paradox, because any Booker ever accepting results in his death before the choice occurs and his death relies upon his survival. The only outcome that won't involve a paradox is if Booker rejects it, because then it means he will have survived the baptism (because Booker only dies if any Booker accepts and every Booker that accepts is erased from the timeline). The mechanics of murdering Booker before the baptism is irrelevant, Elizabeth has become a god that can do anything she wants to the probability space. The simplest way to show the creation of a paradox is by the symbolism we saw, all of the Elizabeth's appearing to drown all of the Booker's before he did anything. She could equally murder Booker every single time he accepts, but you can't show this as easily in an ending to a game and it would still achieve the same result, create a paradox making the choice impossible, all it would do is make the ending longer.

Aplogies to everybody else for the large amounts of posts I've made on this point, sorry if it reads repetitively.

EDIT: Anyway, did Jeremiah Fink remind anybody else of Daniel Plainview in 'There Will Be Blood'? I'm not sure why I'm being reminded of that character via Fink but I think it's due to the character's appearance, time period, presence of a son (I think the child with Kinf is his son anyway, if not it doesn't really matter) and even some of the music of the game.

 

[GoddyofAus]

Did anyone catch "Tainted Love" playing in the Graveyard Shift?

 

[Keyser Soze]

So how does Slate not know Comstock was Booker?

Reasoning-

1. They knew all possible outcomes for this universe
or
2. Booker always picks 77 in all realities. Events were already set in motion for this to always happen
or
3. Because Booker was told to avoid the Number he ended up subconsciousl,y picking it. Without the inference of the letter events would have not happened and the Lutece actually set the whole events of the game in motion
or
4. FUUUUUUUUUUU

 

[Neiteio]

I really want to know how Comstock became wealthy.

I also really want to go on an F12 photo safari in a second playthrough.

 

[Gorillaz]

Did they explain why Liz destroyed NY? I thought that maybe she wanted to get back at booker or something.

Finishing what Comstock started. Basically punishing the world for it's sins and feeling dead inside because Booker never saved her in that dimension

 

[clav]

Did anyone catch "Tainted Love" playing in the Graveyard Shift?

I saw the reference of the Luteces literally digging their own graves. What a visual representation.

Just saw the ending and the post credits bit.

What am I missing from the post credits part? In the reality that Anna was never born?

 

[Neiteio]

For the new page: How did Comstock become wealthy enough to fund Lutece's tear machine in the first place? And to build the floating city of Columbia, for that matter?

 

[SmithnCo]

Did anyone catch "Tainted Love" playing in the Graveyard Shift?

Yes! I like how they don't beat you over the head with these songs, you kinda have to discover them.

 

[TheBaronOfNA]

I thought he did? He kept alluding it throughout his taunting in the museum.

Comstock wasn't there, but you were, etc.

That also would explain why Daisy was shit scared that he came back in the universe where they got the guns. "You will complicate the narrative" .Still, Comstock being born as Booker DeWitt seems to not be common knowladege.

 

[Sorian]

A question, though: How did Comstock become wealthy? Rosalind Lutece was able to fund her tear machine because of Comstock. But clearly, had Booker not been baptised, he would've wound up in poverty. So what did Comstock do differently that led to wealth? I don't think he became wealthy via the tears, since as I understand it, the tears were created by machines funded by his wealth in the first place. And of course, it'd take tremendous resources to create the floating city of Columbia. So... How?

I assume he became wealthy because he founded his own religion. I don't want to sound like an ass but religious fanatics are happy to dump cash on their prophet.

Edit: In regard to the Slate question, I believe Slate had no idea because Comstock didn't exactly advertise his past name and he tried to distance himself from any sins he comitted as Booker. He also looked radically different. As such, I doubt Slate had any reason to even think they were the same person.

 

[Jacksonlee]

I really want to know how Comstock became wealthy.

I also really want to go on an F12 photo safari in a second playthrough.

as he became pious, he begat a collection of people who gave him money?

thats how i see it