Bioshock Infinite edning and story is a total cop out and unfair (some spoilers)

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"] Yes if that is true it would explain everything. I don't see how she knows that there is only one universe where that happens but it would explain the whole ending.sts106mat

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

I still can't get over how beautiful this game is, spoiler pics included so don't click if you haven't beaten the game, this is a spoilers thread anyway.

[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

Sphire

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

What other time would you choose? I mean if she does something before that it could affect the other bookers that have nothing to do with the baptism timeline.

[QUOTE="Sphire"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] yes, which is why at the end of the game, Elizabeth takes him back BEFORE the baptism even takes place.GD1551

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

What other time would you choose? I mean if she does something before that it could affect the other bookers that have nothing to do with the baptism timeline.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="Sphire"] People get that, or at least the concept the game is trying to pass off (I don't necessarily buy the single universe up until baptism point; it's an option, but that just makes it worse, so I'll go with other options). Some see it as brilliant storytelling, others see it as a cop out just for the shock factor. I'm leaning to the latter more and more. It is way too convenient that the only time that the past can be altered is the one baptism moment. No other moment can be altered, ever.

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

Sphire

What other time would you choose? I mean if she does something before that it could affect the other bookers that have nothing to do with the baptism timeline.

There's an infinite number of comstocks, it would be impossible to erase the bad and leave the good.

[QUOTE="redskins26rocs"]

you know i am just wondering if booker had a wife? i found a article to help me understand the whole story, but that is the one thing i am curious about. hope that was not some kind of spoiler tryed to be vague

the_bi99man

It's mentioned in the game. Elizabeth asks about it. Booker says he had a love in his life, but she died giving birth. So Elizabeth says, "you have a child?" and he slowly says, "no".

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

Sphire

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

I think she deserved to live a "normal" life with her father. Selfish? Possibly. :P

[QUOTE="Sphire"][QUOTE="GD1551"]

What other time would you choose? I mean if she does something before that it could affect the other bookers that have nothing to do with the baptism timeline.

GD1551

There's an infinite number of comstocks, it would be impossible to erase the bad and leave the good.

even with the spolier tag, you should definitely remove one of those for the sake of any mistakenly clicking on it. you know which one. sts106mat

Yeah, I guess. You gotta take it out the quote to.

That's an assumption though. I can assume that Elizabeth, with her supernatural powers by the end, could do it. She essentially kills an infinite number of bad Bookers (the ones who become Comstock) through 1 good Booker (it may or may not be 1, I'm still deciding on that) anyway.Sphire

She erased an event from time that erased all of them though, as long as that event is there, there will be infinite universes with different variables and the same constants. For instance the booker we play as is around the 200th or so one the twins brought to columbia in an attempt to stop the infinite loop they caused.

[QUOTE="Sphire"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] yes, which is why at the end of the game, Elizabeth takes him back BEFORE the baptism even takes place.Peredith

If that isn't the case however, and there are other alterable moments, Elizabeth chose the lazy way out and took to killing 'baby' Comstock. She essentially became Daisy. She killed good Comstocks too (as said by Lady Comstock's ghost).

I think she deserved to live a "normal" life with her father. Selfish? Possibly. :P

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="Sphire"]

That's an assumption though. I can assume that Elizabeth, with her supernatural powers by the end, could do it. She essentially kills an infinite number of bad Bookers (the ones who become Comstock) through 1 good Booker (it may or may not be 1, I'm still deciding on that) anyway.sts106mat

She erased an event from time that erased all of them though, as long as that event is there, there will be infinite universes with different variables and the same constants. For instance the booker we play as is around the 200th or so one the twins brought to columbia in an attempt to stop the infinite loop they caused.

That would be the Constant ;)

[QUOTE="Sphire"]

That's an assumption though. I can assume that Elizabeth, with her supernatural powers by the end, could do it. She essentially kills an infinite number of bad Bookers (the ones who become Comstock) through 1 good Booker (it may or may not be 1, I'm still deciding on that) anyway.GD1551

She erased an event from time that erased all of them though, as long as that event is there, there will be infinite universes with different variables and the same constants. For instance the booker we play as is around the 200th or so one the twins brought to columbia in an attempt to stop the infinite loop they caused.

[QUOTE="onnabushi"]1. Time paradox. 2. Every choice creates new univiverses so now there should be universes where Elizabeth fails or decides not to kill comstock. 3. With infinite possibilities in one of them Comstock would go back in time and kill booker. 4. Dosen't stop booker from becoming Comstock some other time or way which would happen considering there are infinite possibilities.KungfuKitten

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="musalala"]

On a side note and to risk a flame war erupting, I think bioshock infintes ending is what mass effect 3's ending tried to clumsily implement. A mind-f*ck ending that would cause gamers to have disscusions such as these, only bioware failed miserably.

musalala

I ment the part about creating massive amounts of discussions about the ending and meaning of the ending. The original ending was supposed to create lots of "speculation for eveyone" according to Mac walters but it failed to do that because of its execution,Because you really couldn"t make sense of what had just happened and if you tried to replay the game you still wouldn't understand. Bishock (for me anyway) I was a bit confused repalyed it found alot of voxiphones and in game clues and finally pieced it together.The revelation of casper the genocidal ghost and his explanation was supposed to be OMG part of mass effect 3..but it felt really forced and contrived. I suppose part of mass effect 3 problem was all the choices they had to take into account when coming up with the end which made it even more complicated

[QUOTE="harry_james_pot"][QUOTE="beganoo"]

Why does she have super powers then, hes a normal guy..

 

oh wait ! quantum physics! That explains eveyrthing.

texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

Trying to avoid spoilers as I'm trying to determine if I should try and finish that really stupid ass "defend the whatever" on the Zepplin towards the end. I really hate those kinds of missions and it's really starting to piss me off. I was really enjoying the game and then they had to throw this bullsh!t at you. Sometimes I really hate video games.

heretrix

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

How? There's only one universe where the Baptism that creates Comstock takes place.

Peredith

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"] Yes if that is true it would explain everything. I don't see how she knows that there is only one universe where that happens but it would explain the whole ending.DarkLink77

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

texasgoldrush

Welcome to every story ever told. It does, actually, but whatever.

Her killing Comstock isn't out of character considering he tortures her for an undisclosed period of time, which makes her very, very angry.

It does have a plot hole, here and there, but i think it's a very well told story. Easly one of the best in gaming!

Here's a simple and very accurate (in my opinion) interpretation of the events:

SPOILERS

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Peredith"]

Constants and Variables, it's demonstrated throughout the entire game (Cointoss, Pendant, ect) :?

Bookers life up until the Baptism that creates Comstock is Constant, the Baptism is the Variable.

texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] This. All of it is explained, people just aren't paying attention. Certain events happen the same way every time no matter what. See: the coin flip.DarkLink77

Welcome to every story ever told.

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] yep, that explains his chalkboard, showing its always heads, but it also means there are tens of thousands, cause surely the odds of it coming up heads every time ?

sts106mat

That would be the Constant ;)

An event that will always happen, fate, basically. When Booker flips that coin, it'll always land on heads, hence all the chalk strikes under heads, and none under tails on Male Luteces chalk board.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apRrPFXmRH0

Elizabeth explains it beautifully. :)

hey guys, i'm still not getting the whole "AD" on his hand thing. i assume that stands for anna dwitt? but why is it there?

[QUOTE="lazerface216"]

hey guys, i'm still not getting the whole "AD" on his hand thing. i assume that stands for anna dwitt? but why is it there?

sts106mat

did they explain that part in the game? did i miss that?

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="lazerface216"]

hey guys, i'm still not getting the whole "AD" on his hand thing. i assume that stands for anna dwitt? but why is it there?

lazerface216

did they explain that part in the game? did i miss that?

Oh one more thing. So you can understa why I call it going "over board".

 

Do you know what the infinte multiverse really is supposed to be?

 

Ok imagine that there is a world that is exactly like ours expet there is one atom missing in the universe. Now imagie the same world but with 2 missing atoms.

Now imagine a universe where our world is flat and there are bumblebees riding tigers.They all exist simultaneosly. And that just 3 worlds. There are infinite worlds, atom for atom, second for second EVERYTHING that can possibly be is, every human idea + infinity, every sigle littel thing,from a universe with one atom to a univers with elephants flying in space. EVERYTHING EVER, IN EVERY TIME AT THE SAME TIME. Every single possibility IN TO exitance in any given fragment of time and space over and oaver and over again in to in which every universe is infinte by itself.

 

This theory is just insanely huge. Its not just "he gets baptised or not" there is no starting ponit for them to kill him. Everything is one and its literary everything.

  beganoo

It is though. They said they needed to get back to the point where Comstock was born and kill him there, the baptism was exactly that point.

There must by happy elizabeths, sad elizabeths ,no elizabeths at all, elizabeths that are moneky and any other possibility in any other time.

All of this ruins the game world.Its has no place in bioshock. Even if they wanted they could never have represented the theory properly so why do it at all.

It was just so ridiculous for them to make it 2 options.Hes baptised or not.He becomes Comstock or not.There must be billions of different ways hes story happend in the multiverse.Not just 2... its really dumb.

beganoo

Would showing an elizabeth that was a monkey at the end have made you that much happier ? :|

[QUOTE="lazerface216"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] he calved it into his hand as penance for his guilt in giving away anna. @peredith, thanks. sts106mat

did they explain that part in the game? did i miss that?

Its explained I think its Lutece who mentions that he did it as some kind of penance.

Here is the thing...WE DON'T WANT LIZ KILLING!!!!!!!!!texasgoldrush

Speak for yourself. I thought the ending was brilliant, and I don't give half a sh!t about any reasons anyone can list off about why it's not. If Ken Levine is smart, he'll stand by his work, and not compromise his own integrity and the integrity of his game by bending to the will of a vocal minority who feel entitled to something for some stupid fvcking reason, like Bioware did.

[QUOTE="onnabushi"][QUOTE="sts106mat"] but because you don't get it, you would think that.sts106mat

Done and done.

ITT "I'm too stupid to understand this ending so it sux!"