Bioshock infinite spoiler thread. Free discussion about the plot and ending.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,735
442
126
Dammit...had a whole essay of a post written up and I guess I forgot to submit it when I went into work. Anyways, its kind of interesting how they tweaked the game from the original gameplay they showed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bbf2L62I6g8

I almost didnt play the game because of that video, but none of this is in the game.
Looking back at all those old ads I kind of feel short changed now. Several other chunks of game that weren't necessarily promised, but expected, and didn't make it into the final product. When you barely clock in at 12 hours of game you start to wonder where all that other stuff went to.
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
I ran across another interesting notion. That Booker Dewitt/Comstock may be the the alternate universe version of Jack (or maybe even Andrew Ryan) from the first Bioshock game. There is evidence for this. The first is the most obvious. Elizabeth says "There is always a lighthouse, a man, a city". I'm sure we all drew the conclusion that the lighthouse at the beginning of the first bioshock was probably at least one of the lighthouses she was talking about, and of course there's Rapture and Jack as the city and the man. Naturally Booker Dewitt has to be "The Man" in BSI, because in a way he's both of the men that might be him. Of course Columbia is the city. So we have Dewitt on one side, and Jack or Ryan on the other.

The most telling thing is the fact that you are able to use the bathysphere in the rapture scene at the end of the game. If you remember from the first game, the bathysperes are genetically coded to only work for Andrew Ryan, but they worked for Jack too because he was close enough genetically to Ryan by virtue of being his son. The bathysphere also apparently works for Booker Dewitt.

It's not perfect. There is no analogue for Elizabeth/Anna in rapture, but I don't think there has to be anyone but a man, a lighthouse, and a city to make her statement include Rapture. The main problem with the whole thing is the time gap. The events of Rapture happen something like 30 years after the events of Columbia. She could still be talking about Rapture in that statement, but Dewitt or his analogue may have nothing to do with it at all. Or perhaps through some trick of relative dating between two universes or something it can be the 1940s in one universe even while it runs concurrently with universes that are in the 1910s. Food for thought anyway.
 
Last edited:

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,450
7
81
There could be an event that predates both games, and it determines if you get Jack or Booker path. Maybe thats what Bioshock 4 will be about. Linking both games the way they leads to more questions...
 

PhatoseAlpha

Platinum Member
Apr 10, 2005
2,130
12
81
Sure there is an analogue for Elizabeth. Jack. Booker is Comstock, and Comstock is Ryan, thus Booker is Ryan. Elizabeth is Anna is Booker's child, and Jack is Ryan's child.

I'm not sure the time gap is really a problem. The impression I got was that the Siphon was heavily limiting Elizabeth's power, so she could only go to world 'near' to the current one. As she describes it, most of them are very boring because so little has changed. Once the Siphon is destroyed, she's capable of going a lot further.

At any rate, it's the interpretation that makes the game's title meaningful.
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,735
442
126
Sure there is an analogue for Elizabeth. Jack. Booker is Comstock, and Comstock is Ryan, thus Booker is Ryan. Elizabeth is Anna is Booker's child, and Jack is Ryan's child.

I'm not sure the time gap is really a problem. The impression I got was that the Siphon was heavily limiting Elizabeth's power, so she could only go to world 'near' to the current one. As she describes it, most of them are very boring because so little has changed. Once the Siphon is destroyed, she's capable of going a lot further.

At any rate, it's the interpretation that makes the game's title meaningful.
Nah, Jack=Booker and Comstock=Ryan. If anything Elizabeth is represented by the little sisters and they're both protected by the giant mechanical Big Daddies (or Songbird)
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
I don't blame Andrew Ryan or Comstock for being disgusted with people who didn't help build their glorious cities trying to drag them down and tear them apart and ruin them.

Seems very understandable to me.

Anybody can tear something down, few can build something magnificent.

I also don't see why the people of Colombia were somehow obligated to include anyone and everyone? I don't have the right to go live in Bill Gates' mansion, and he isn't a d-bag if he tries to stop me. Even if he hires me as his janitor, that doesn't entitle me to start sleeping in the master bedroom, and if I use violence to try to get my way... I'm the d-bag, not him when he shoots me.

I didn't really understand why old Elizabeth simultaneously wanted to stop herself from doing what she was doing, by sending you back in time with a note... AND also continued to do what she was doing! If she had the desire to stop, why not just stop? Also... 1983 America can't fight back? Against some zeppelins? Bring out the jets? Blow Colombia out of the sky?

I thought the whole "Booker is Comstock DUN DUN DUN!!!!" was sort of stupid, tacked on, and a twist for twist's sake. I think having Elizabeth be his daughter was sufficient twist.

The game was good, but Bioshock 1 is quite a bit better in every way except visual splendor and detail of the world. Andrew Ryan is cooler, Rapture is cooler, etc.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
I don't think the multiverse is all in the same time -- besides Elizabeth's moving back and forth, Fink's brother used the tears to become a celebrated composer by stealing music from the Beach Boys, Tears for Fears, etc.

Speaking of music, Troy Baker and Courtnee Draper did a great job on their duet. I found the guitar in shantytown before seeing the youtube / end credits video of them, so that was a nice Easter egg for me. If their VA /acting doesn't pan out they could make a career as a folkie duo :)
 

Madia

Senior member
May 2, 2006
487
1
0
On the ending. I agree that the reason why all the Elizabeth's disappear is because she ceases to be.
Actually, if you watch the ending again all the Elizabeth's disappear but one.

I beat the game late last night so I still haven't time to process everything but I think if someone comes up with a chronological timeline it would help immensely. From what I remember, it seems like the following events preceded Columbia seceding from the USA:

1. Booker Dewitt participates in the battle of Wounded Knee and the Boxer Rebellion. His service was marked by brutality including burning down native American families in their tents and scalping so many native americans his fellow soldiers nicknamed him the white Indian.

2. After the battles Booker worked for the pinkertons suppressing labor uprisings. Somewhere around this time, haunted by his actions during wartime and his current job he began drinking, gambling and entered into a relationship with a woman.

3. The woman dies in childbirth and Booker is left a single father in a great amount of debt. Robert Lutece offers to erase that debt in exchange for the child (Anna). Booker agrees to the deal but comes to regret it and tries to save Anna but fails at the last minute.

4. Racked with guilt over his past sins he seeks forgiveness through baptism. (note: I don't know what sect of Christianity baptized him but I've never heard of someone taking a new last name in baptism - only a new first name. It would make sense if later he officially changed his last name to Comstock in an effort to distance himself from his past but I think having him change his full name at the baptism was done for storyline reasons (at that moment he became Zachary Comstock) rather than accuracy.

5. Some time afterwards Comstock is visited by an angel (was this just a delusion of his or something he viewed from a tear?) which causes him to reject Christianity and start a new religion in his own name.

6. Afterwards would involve his meeting of Rosalind Lutece, building of Columbia and eventual cessation from the USA and ascent into the sky.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
Actually, if you watch the ending again all the Elizabeth's disappear but one.

I beat the game late last night so I still haven't time to process everything but I think if someone comes up with a chronological timeline it would help immensely. From what I remember, it seems like the following events preceded Columbia seceding from the USA:


4. Racked with guilt over his past sins he seeks forgiveness through baptism. (note: I don't know what sect of Christianity baptized him but I've never heard of someone taking a new last name in baptism - only a new first name. It would make sense if later he officially changed his last name to Comstock in an effort to distance himself from his past but I think having him change his full name at the baptism was done for storyline reasons (at that moment he became Zachary Comstock) rather than accuracy.

5. Some time afterwards Comstock is visited by an angel (was this just a delusion of his or something he viewed from a tear?) which causes him to reject Christianity and start a new religion in his own name.
The last note implies that our Elizabeth disappears off screen. All the other disappearances correspond with the piano notes. There's no one left to disappear by the end except our Elizabeth.

4. The name changing goes along with the theme of rebirth. People try to change their names all the time to become a new person. It's a way to leave their past behind.

5. Comstock was never visited by an angel. Most religious figures have some sort of divine meeting in his origin story. Comstock made up his. It's been a common practice throughout human history. Often, whether someone believes a religion is real or not, depends on whether a person believes in its origin stories. He's not rejecting Christianity. He's co-opting it and creating a new sect.

On the question brought up about causality. Yes, I don't think many writers ever adhere to causality, because that would make the story frustratingly static.

On the connection between Rapture and Columbia, I think Levine threw that in there just to mind fuck the players. I don't think DeWitt and Jack are analogs. They do not have similar themes. Andrew Ryan and Comstock have somewhat similar themes, but only because all villains usually have some delusions of grandeur, don't they?

Not to mention, that, since they all spring from the mind of Levine,they will have some surface similarities. Also, being a game, we almost always have to have a hero character and a villain, don't we?
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
Looking back at all those old ads I kind of feel short changed now. Several other chunks of game that weren't necessarily promised, but expected, and didn't make it into the final product. When you barely clock in at 12 hours of game you start to wonder where all that other stuff went to.
Cutting room floor. Irrational is known for it's iterative process. I mean, they even cut the very powerful horse scene and replaced it with the far weaker bee scene. Why? My guess is pacing.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
I don't think the multiverse is all in the same time -- besides Elizabeth's moving back and forth, Fink's brother used the tears to become a celebrated composer by stealing music from the Beach Boys, Tears for Fears, etc.

Speaking of music, Troy Baker and Courtnee Draper did a great job on their duet. I found the guitar in shantytown before seeing the youtube / end credits video of them, so that was a nice Easter egg for me. If their VA /acting doesn't pan out they could make a career as a folkie duo :)
I totally missed the Fink's brother thing. Sweet find!
 

Madia

Senior member
May 2, 2006
487
1
0
5. Comstock was never visited by an angel. Most religious figures have some sort of divine meeting in his origin story. Comstock made up his. It's been a common practice throughout human history. Often, whether someone believes a religion is real or not, depends on whether a person believes in its origin stories. He's not rejecting Christianity. He's co-opting it and creating a new sect.
For me the main omission from bioshock infinite was that it never touched on Dewitt's transformation into Comstock post baptism. We never get the story of how a deeply regretful Dewitt becomes the racist, xenophobic man we see in Columbia. I would've liked the game to give us some details of that transformation. Perhaps it will be touched on in the future dlc's.

I forgot to mention that Comstock could've been lying about the angel's visitation but I don't think the game gives us a concrete answer unless it's in a voxophone I missed. The options seem to be that the visitation was a lie, delusion or a tear. I think the answer lies in the question of why did Comstock found Columbia in the first place. He could have founded Columbia as a way to run away from his past sins (hence calling Columbia the new eden or new ark) and have lied about the visitation in order to get other to share his way of thinking. Or the mental stress of his guilt could've caused a hallucination in which he was told to build Columbia as the new eden that would enable him to escape his guilt. The most likely explanation seems to be that he saw the future Columbia along with how to build it (get the help of rosalind lutece) through a tear and that inspired him to found Columbia. What he saw through the tear/tears also gave him the gift of what he thought was prophecy.

To me it seems that he does reject Christianity. I don't remember any mention of Christ or anything from the New Testament in Columbia. The only two books of the Bible I remembered referenced were Genesis and Exodus.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
For me the main omission from bioshock infinite was that it never touched on Dewitt's transformation into Comstock post baptism. We never get the story of how a deeply regretful Dewitt becomes the racist, xenophobic man we see in Columbia. I would've liked the game to give us some details of that transformation. Perhaps it will be touched on in the future dlc's.

I forgot to mention that Comstock could've been lying about the angel's visitation but I don't think the game gives us a concrete answer unless it's in a voxophone I missed. The options seem to be that the visitation was a lie, delusion or a tear. I think the answer lies in the question of why did Comstock found Columbia in the first place. He could have founded Columbia as a way to run away from his past sins (hence calling Columbia the new eden or new ark) and have lied about the visitation in order to get other to share his way of thinking. Or the mental stress of his guilt could've caused a hallucination in which he was told to build Columbia as the new eden that would enable him to escape his guilt. The most likely explanation seems to be that he saw the future Columbia along with how to build it (get the help of rosalind lutece) through a tear and that inspired him to found Columbia. What he saw through the tear/tears also gave him the gift of what he thought was prophecy.

To me it seems that he does reject Christianity. I don't remember any mention of Christ or anything from the New Testament in Columbia. The only two books of the Bible I remembered referenced were Genesis and Exodus.
I'm actually surprised that you actually think that he was "really visited" by an angel at all. If you believe in angels, I figure you'd think the angel would pick someone better than a moral degenerate.

Co-opting a religion doesn't mean he has to believe in it. There's a long line of historical figures who have done that. I find it likely that he does, however. There are angel statues, references to sins, baptisms etc.

Given the time period, I find it doubtful that he would out and out create a new religion that competes with Christianity. Not to mention the priest that baptizes Comstock is the same priest that baptizes people into Columbia.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
The "Angel" could have been one of the aged Elizabeths after she'd given in to the brainwashing. Or a future alternate of himself. Or one of the Luteces.

Access to (alternate) future history would explain how he was able to establish himself as a prophet and gain followers and the funds needed to build Columbia.

I can see him becoming racist and xenophobic to escape from the guilt of his past massacres. If Chinese and Native Americans weren't his equals, then his actions in the Boxer Rebellion and at Wounded Knee become "justified."
 
Last edited:

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,450
7
81
The "Angel" could have been one of the aged Elizabeths after she'd given in to the brainwashing. Or a future alternate of himself. Or one of the Luteces.

Access to (alternate) future history would explain how he was able to establish himself as a prophet and gain followers and the funds needed to build Columbia.

I can see him becoming racist and xenophobic to escape from the guilt of his past massacres. If Chinese and Native Americans weren't his equals, then his actions in the Boxer Rebellion and at Wounded Knee become "justified."
But the act of a baptism means your sins are washed away. If he believed in the baptism, he wouldnt feel guilt over his past transgressions. He probably believes his views are the natural order of things.

But something must have given him the support he needed to build Columbia, especially since he did in an half a lifetime. Just the cage Elizabeth was in would have been a monumental undertaking, let alone the floating city. It must have been intervention from one of the tears. To someone who doesnt know any better, they could been seen as an angel.
 
Last edited:

Madia

Senior member
May 2, 2006
487
1
0
I'm actually surprised that you actually think that he was "really visited" by an angel at all. If you believe in angels, I figure you'd think the angel would pick someone better than a moral degenerate.
I didn't say that I thought the visitation of the angel actually happened (the game makes it pretty clear that an angel as we understand them never visited him), I'm saying that either he lied about it, hallucinated it or what he thought was an angel's visitation was actually a tear. I tend to believe in the tear theory especially considering his history with Lutece. Being able to open tears and see into them would explain his gift of what he believed was prophesy. It would also explain why his daughter was able to open tears.

I can see him becoming racist and xenophobic to escape from the guilt of his past massacres. If Chinese and Native Americans weren't his equals, then his actions in the Boxer Rebellion and at Wounded Knee become "justified."
That's a good point about why he becomes racist/xenophobic. I think the main theme of the game is a someone trying to escape from the guilt of their past sins. That obviously applies to Booker/Comstock but I wonder if it also applies to the Luteces. It's hard to tell since they're portrayed as quirky and often in humorous situations but I wonder what lengths Rosalind Lutece actually went through to bring her "brother" into her world. Does she feel guilt over her association with Comstock and what she's done to help build Columbia and imprison Elizabeth? Does her brother feel guilt over taking Anna from Booker? Is using Dewitt for the mission to get Elizabeth their attempt to atone for their sins?

But the act of a baptism means your sins are washed away. If he believed in the baptism, he wouldnt feel guilt over it. It probably believes his views are the natural order of things.
The sacrament of Baptism absolves the recipient of their sins but it doesn't wash away the feelings of guilt. True the guilt is gone but the wounds of sin (including feeling terrible over what one has done) still remains. For example, a person who lost their family in a car accident due to driving drunk would have that sin and any others forgiven in Baptism but the wounds of those sins would remain. After Baptism that person could still feel horrible about the accident even though they know the sin was forgiven. If the person from then on lives a good life they could find peace but it's possible the accident would haunt them until their death.

Perhaps Booker was never looking for his guilt to be absolved but instead looking for an escape to his feelings of guilt. With his feelings of guilt still there he could have either looked to build Columbia in an attempt to escape his guilt or have been open to the "vision" of Columbia as a place that would be a new eden and escape from his past sins.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
But the act of a baptism means your sins are washed away. If he believed in the baptism, he wouldnt feel guilt over it. It probably believes his views are the natural order of things.

But something must have given him the support he needed to build Columbia, especially since he did in an half a lifetime. Just the cage Elizabeth was in would have been a monumental undertaking, let alone the floating city. It must have been intervention from one of the tears. To someone who doesnt know any better, they could been seen as an angel.
The act of baptism is supposed to wash away sins. Doesn't mean it actually does. Just like Mother Theresa was supposed to be a paragon of faith, but she wasn't sure she even believed in God at the end.

While it's possible he met an angel, I think it's entirely probable that he made it up and used his visions of the alternate realities to create his prophesy. Taking his recounting of his meeting of with an angel literally just doesn't match his actual personality. As for meeting with alternate versions of him or Elizabeth that's slightly more plausible, but I still think is unlikely.

The biggest unanswered question, for me, is where did Songbird come from? It's vastly more powerful than anything else in the game. Lutece, Comstock, or Fink couldn't have made him, could they?
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
The biggest unanswered question, for me, is where did Songbird come from? It's vastly more powerful than anything else in the game. Lutece, Comstock, or Fink couldn't have made him, could they?
There is a voxophone recording by Fink that indicates that he saw something through a tear that was part machine and part man. It has been hypothesized that what he saw was the construction of a big daddy from the first bioshock. In any case Fink pointedly muses that Comstock might be interested in the technology as protection for his new tower project, presumably the tower that Elizabeth was kept in. So it seems that Fink was indeed the manufacturer of Songbird. I'm curious about who it was that got turned into songbird, since it seems there would need to be a human component. I wonder if it was someone who cared for Elizabeth, and hence had the emotional attachment to her that made their strange relationship possible.
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,730
670
126
There was a voxophone recording in your first visit to the tower of a man who was dying, vowing to protect Elizabeth from the false shepherd - was that Comstock or someone else?

If not Comstock, he might be the one.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,450
7
81
The act of baptism is supposed to wash away sins. Doesn't mean it actually does. Just like Mother Theresa was supposed to be a paragon of faith, but she wasn't sure she even believed in God at the end.

While it's possible he met an angel, I think it's entirely probable that he made it up and used his visions of the alternate realities to create his prophesy. Taking his recounting of his meeting of with an angel literally just doesn't match his actual personality. As for meeting with alternate versions of him or Elizabeth that's slightly more plausible, but I still think is unlikely.

The biggest unanswered question, for me, is where did Songbird come from? It's vastly more powerful than anything else in the game. Lutece, Comstock, or Fink couldn't have made him, could they?
I'm not a religious man, but I would think the logic of the baptism would dictate that the one receiving it would be free from sin, at least in their mind. It washes away the sins in the eyes of God, and if there is no one higher than God, you should be golden.

I dont think he literally met an angel, but someone or something that was beyond his understanding. He could have simply made it up, but if he didn't attribute his success to a higher being, that would have made him even more powerful among his followers. There is also the possibility that he somehow saw that combining religion and patriotism was the best way to build his community. The problem is, from what we know of Booker, he didnt really have the background for such thinking. He was more of a follower, and its hard to reconcile what he was and who he became without some sort of guidance.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
There is a voxophone recording by Fink that indicates that he saw something through a tear that was part machine and part man. It has been hypothesized that what he saw was the construction of a big daddy from the first bioshock. In any case Fink pointedly muses that Comstock might be interested in the technology as protection for his new tower project, presumably the tower that Elizabeth was kept in. So it seems that Fink was indeed the manufacturer of Songbird. I'm curious about who it was that got turned into songbird, since it seems there would need to be a human component. I wonder if it was someone who cared for Elizabeth, and hence had the emotional attachment to her that made their strange relationship possible.

I took this to be the origin of the Handiman. Later there's a few voxophones of the handimen being developed. It seemed plural so I never connected this to the Songbird. I'm not sure though.
 

giantpandaman2

Senior member
Oct 17, 2005
580
11
81
I'm not a religious man, but I would think the logic of the baptism would dictate that the one receiving it would be free from sin, at least in their mind. It washes away the sins in the eyes of God, and if there is no one higher than God, you should be golden.
Again, there's a big difference between what "should be" and what actually is. Logic doesn't dictate emotion. Never has. I've known plenty of people both religious and non-religious. I've never felt that one was more cleansed from sin than another. Baptized or not. PTSD and guilt just don't care about logic.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY