none. the ending was to make a point of the constants between the various universes.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bioshock Infinite | Official Spoiler Thread |
- Thread starter BruceLeeRoy
- Start date
none. the ending was to make a point of the constants between the various universes.
Yes and no. Remember, the whole bring us the girl and wipe away the debt was a memory formed by booker because of the time jump. But booker does believe he is actually doing it... so in his mind/heart, he is doing it twice... poor Elizabeth..
Question: some said something about booker voxophones. Did you mean booker booker, or booker comstock?
Also: who sent me the Telegram? Can i assume it was lutece?
Ok, I got almost everything in theory. But what isn't really clear to me is which Booker is killed in the end. Does she kill every Booker ever who takes the Baptism? Or are you taken back to a point in time where only one Booker exists yet (before the baptism) and she kills you there, thus creating a paradox, thus preventing any Booker from ever taking the Baptism? But wouldn't that mean that there are two Bookers in that timeline if she brings you there, so she'd have to kill both you and the Booker already there?
I don't think its possible for only 1 Booker to ever exist. I think its every Booker who goes to the baptism and kills him/them before he can accept it or reject it. If there was any others it would create the possibility of Comstock being "born" from Booker.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I think that the ending where multiple Elizabeths drown Booker is meant to represent ALL Elizabeths across the probability-verse drowning all the potential Comstocks, thus causing the paradox that resets everything.
The post-credits stinger suggests that at least one Booker who doesn't take the baptism survives.
...or summink.
EDIT:
I think you're right about her immunity. She never suffers from cognitive dissonance. However, I think there are two Elizabeths in the Martyr!Timeline. The Martyr!Timeline is based on the fact that Martyr!Comstock had the foresight to move Martyr!Elizabeth to the heavily fortified Comstock House, necessitating Martyr!Booker's involvement in the Vox uprising. We don't stay in that timeline long enough to actually meet Martyr!Elizabeth, though. We get shifted at least once more crossing the bridge to Comstock House, I think, if not before...
...or summink.
What I don't get is (as you mentioned) what's the variable in Our!Booker's universe that would create the Martyr!Timeline...? There is no indication or even nod to it.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Like I say, I think it's meant to be symbolic. You're playing at this point as a kind of Pre!Booker; a Booker before he makes his choice. This means he is still potentially Comstock.
Being simply told infinite Elizabeths killed infinite Bookers wouldn't have much impact; being literally shown it would be nigh-on impossible. This is the best compromise.
That's my take, at least. Someone feel free to shoot me down.
Yeah, I kind of took it as "Before you make the choice, you have to die so you cannot make the wrong choice at all." Because if you try to kill just Comstock-Booker, there will always be a branch that will create a Comstock Booker as well. The only solution is to cut the tree below the branch, so it never may never happen.
This in turn, starts the paradox, since if Booker/Comstock never existed, Elizabeth could never exist, thus she could never drown him.
Man, this whole story... So cool.
This in turn, starts the paradox, since if Booker/Comstock never existed, Elizabeth could never exist, thus she could never drown him.
Man, this whole story... So cool.
Yeah I actually get the whole part about killing him before he makes the choice or creating a paradox to prevent the possibility of him accepting the baptism. The problem I have is wrapping my head around which Booker(s) get killed. It would make sense to me if she killed Booker before he makes the choice as that would create the paradox and prevent him from ever accepting the baptism. I don't like the idea that you're controlling a symbolic Booker when they are drowning you because if that's so how can this Booker know that he is both Booker and Comstock? You're still the same Booker you were the entire game. If they killed Booker before the choice the player Booker would be erased anyway, right? Is his drowning just in the game to have a nice reveal? I wouldn't like that, but I could accept it.
Does the special edition soundtrack have the licensed songs? Like the ragtime version of Everybody Wants to Rule the World, God Only Knows by the quartet, or Girls Just Wanna Have Fun from Battleship Bay?
(asking in here because I've seen some people saying the presence of the anachronistic songs is a spoiler)
(asking in here because I've seen some people saying the presence of the anachronistic songs is a spoiler)
Sadly no.
kingschiebi
Member
From my interpretation, all of them get killed and that is what creates the paradox. Most people seem convinced that it is an either/or question, but I would say that since we as a singular booker are seeing all the liz's from different realities, that makes that one Booker a constant. Clearly it is hard to say as there is no hard evidence if there even were Bookers who did not go to the baptism or any other variations.
Liz is not just reshuffling the variables, but removing a constant which in turn makes the universe collapse all realities, rewind and start new - effectively giving them all a new start.
The only thing that doesn't fully fit there is that Booker is so agitated when he wakes up, but I'm fine with accepting him adjusting to the new reality and still having the fading memory similar to what we all have after a nightmare. (makes one think, maybe it was all just a dream - dun dun dun!)
Ultimately, we as a player are the only constant observer to the whole thing and that would only leave our individual perception to be the defining anchor that everything wraps around one way or the other. That still makes it an infinite amount of universes depending on the number of players and playthroughs.
On an unrelated side note, I really like how character respawns were given a story explanation in Infinite and how it is literally the interactive version of the hero with a thousand faces that also is presented on a small enough scale for us to appreciate it from outside the box in its multitude.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I'm not entirely sure we are the same Booker. Forgetting how many times we as the player get killed (without Elizabeth around), there are a few story-based occasions where we wake up back in the "dead room" that are never quite explained (at least, I don't recall them being explained). That's a pet theory anyway.
The Booker you play at the end is all Bookers, as far as I can tell, just as the 6 or so Elizabeths are all Elizabeths. Our!Booker is drowned and erased, along with all of the events we just played, when all the Elizabeths kill him. Elizabeth has drawn Our!Booker back to this point specifically to do that.
That's what I get from it anyways.
EDIT: Beaten by a better explanation.
Damn, that's shitty. Those are incredible.
HueyFreeman
Banned
So is this the greatest chase music of all time? Yes, yes I believe it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SvafNVfKE8#t=02m50s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SvafNVfKE8#t=02m50s
FaustsBoon
Member
Well, I guess that is appropriate as Ken Levine and I went to the same program at the same school. We're hard-wired for pretentious wankery.
Ok, so I just spent 15 minutes typing, deleting and retyping a response and then it kinda started to make sense. So all the Elisabeths that make it to the pond kill every Booker ever? This creates the paradox that prevents him from ever getting baptised?
Small question: What happens to Elizabeth between when she and Booker fall from the Sky Line (after escaping Monument Island) and when Booker wakes up on the beach? She doesn't look to be wet from the ocean, and the way she dances in the next scene implies she isn't hurt from the fall.
Probably just a narrative short-cut I suppose.
Probably just a narrative short-cut I suppose.
Reminds me of march of the Luthien
PumpkinPie
Banned
The Booker that was baptised never had Anna and then became Comstock? Or he always had Anna?
He never had Anna after accepting the baptism which is why Comstock!Booker kidnaps Anna.
PumpkinPie
Banned
How does Comstock know that Anna exists if he never had her/ gave her away to begin with?
Sorry if it was explained, I'm still processing the events.
Presumably he saw it through a tear.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Yus, spot on. It is kind of a Grandfather paradox which is then rectified via the Novikov Self-Consistency Principle. Y'know, just to confuse stuff
GoddyofAus
Banned
They totally should've included a Vigor that turns you into a Werewolf like Beast.
https://www.facebook.com/maureenmurphymusic
This is the woman who sang that version, if anyone is interested.
Voice of Reason
Banned
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
You, good sir, just made me realise how similar that is to when Comstock initially takes her. I doff my cap at thee.
Voice of Reason
Banned
Maybe Bruce should reconfigure the OT to add the gif along with the other one.
The One Who Knocks
Member
Just want to say it's confirmed in the game that Anna was taken the 8th October 1893 via the flashback at the end rather than solely implied via the Voxophones:
In the last picture you can still see the calendar on the table. Sorry for the really bad picture quality, I don't have a capture card, but it serves the purpose of emphasing the 8th October 1983 as the date that Anna is taken, so it's not just implied via Voxophones, it's actually shown. Maybe somebody on Steam could take proper, higher quality pictures.
EDIT: Oh and these pictures are really large so I don't advise clicking on them unless you can't read the calendar/see it in the quote.
EDIT: Although, it still is only implied that that's the first date that Robert Lutece crossed over. In the end he has dialogue similar to "If I get caught it'll be a very, very long time before we see each other" if you delay pressing X to grab Comstock and Anna which could also suggest this.
In the last picture you can still see the calendar on the table. Sorry for the really bad picture quality, I don't have a capture card, but it serves the purpose of emphasing the 8th October 1983 as the date that Anna is taken, so it's not just implied via Voxophones, it's actually shown. Maybe somebody on Steam could take proper, higher quality pictures.
EDIT: Oh and these pictures are really large so I don't advise clicking on them unless you can't read the calendar/see it in the quote.
EDIT: Although, it still is only implied that that's the first date that Robert Lutece crossed over. In the end he has dialogue similar to "If I get caught it'll be a very, very long time before we see each other" if you delay pressing X to grab Comstock and Anna which could also suggest this.
Wishmaster92
Member
Has the meaning of these been discussed?
At the entrance of the tower in Monument Island.
And at the tower when you first meet Elizabeth, it's a book about Paris, this is before Booker even mentioned anything about it.
At the entrance of the tower in Monument Island.
And at the tower when you first meet Elizabeth, it's a book about Paris, this is before Booker even mentioned anything about it.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Has the meaning of these been discussed?
At the entrance of the tower in Monument Island.
And at the tower when you first meet Elizabeth, it's a book about Paris, this is before Booker even mentioned anything about it.
I think someone said that the markings on the gasmask are something to do with gasmasks. Not sure what and I can't find the post at the second.
Elizabeth always wanted to go to Paris, hence her painting a picture of the Effiel Tower.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
The Vox Populi stuff is really the weakest element of the narrative. The revolutionaries being just as bad as Comstock is such a boring-ass storytelling choice. WTF Levine
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, it certainly lacks explanation as to why they are so bad... y'know, apart from all the violence and that.
The One Who Knocks
Member
Yeah, that was mentioned before. Is it the same gas mask? I can't really tell but it doesn't seem to matter (as if not it's almost certainly just a reused asset). EDIT: Not the same one so probably just a reused asset.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Ah! Nice one.
Please forgive me if this has been posted already but I find this unbelievable
http://kotaku.com/this-crazy-bioshock-infinite-easter-egg-cant-be-real-464902193
http://kotaku.com/this-crazy-bioshock-infinite-easter-egg-cant-be-real-464902193
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Which is nothing compared to the tyrannical racist murderous bastards of Comstock's reign. They've got sound reasons for their uprising, now I'm suppose to fight them? And the reasoning for fighting them is REALLY weak. "Booker is alive? That's weird, uh, shoot him!"
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Heheheh! I think it was a cop-out in many respects. Considering they alluded to 9/11 quite blatantly, you'd think Levine would be brave enough to give a sound reason as to why the equality-seeking Vox are actually assholes rather than the hand-waving it receives. A rare mistep in an otherwise brilliant game.
Tummi Gummi
Member
Fitzroy's reasoning is that martyred Booker was a critical symbol of the revolution. Live Booker complicates that narrative, making her and the Vox leadership as a whole look like liars (for example), so she tries to have him killed. Once Fitzroy's dead, the order to have Booker killed has already gone out over the city, and presumably either "fake" Booker is considered an assassin, or the Vox later in the game don't even recognize him and attack simply because he's a civilian, or because he's an armed combatant not wearing Vox colours, or because he's with Elizabeth etc. That particular aspect could've been given a bit of extra attention, sure. Even though the final battles against the Vox can technically be justified, it still seems a bit stupid.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I personally thought the Vox should've received the same treatment as The Founders: appear great initially till you scratch the surface. Could've added a few hours of gameplay, too. I guess since Booker's entire time in Columbia is really him going through his sins and regrets writ large, the Vox didn't really figure into that journey as much.
Wishmaster92
Member
Lol kotaku late yet again.... I believe this was discussed a couple of days ago.
Daisy and the Vox in general felt undercooked. While they shouldn't have received the attention Comstock did, for obvious reasons, I feel like some messages the game was trying to convey were muddied up a bit due to the story spending most of its time concerned with the Founders.