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

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
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.
I thought that too, but I noticed that the name of the voxophone recording was "A Child Needs a Protector". It makes less sense for it to be referring to a Handiman if the thing in question was specifically meant as protection for Elizabeth.
 

slag

Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
10,473
81
101
I thought that too, but I noticed that the name of the voxophone recording was "A Child Needs a Protector". It makes less sense for it to be referring to a Handiman if the thing in question was specifically meant as protection for Elizabeth.

What significance, if any, is there in picking which choker Elizabeth wears in the beginning of the game?
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
What significance, if any, is there in picking which choker Elizabeth wears in the beginning of the game?
It doesn't change anything in the game, but it does have significance. Throughout the game there is a theme of inevitability, characterized by the coin flip always turning out one way, Comstock's occasional mentioning of the futility of Booker striving against prophesy, Elizabeth's statement that in every universe Booker always gave her to Comstock, and how no matter which lighthouse he chose at the end it would always take him to the same place.

Elizabeth also mentions that there are constants and variables between universes. The coin flip is a constant, and the choice of choker is a variable. Whether or not you kill Cornelius Slate is also a variable. What I think the game is pointing out by allowing you to make these choices is that it doesn't matter what choices you make. The outcome, besides the possibility of Booker's failure and death, is inevitable. The way they choose to end the ordeal is the only way it is possible to end it no matter what minor differences there may be. Even his death can't stop that outcome in the end, because the Luteces will keep bringing him back.

The linear nature of the game itself then becomes a story element, because the story is about a man who really is on on rails, with no real way of changing anything but inconsequential details. It's kind of dark when you think about it.
 
Last edited:

Udgnim

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2008
3,661
104
106
What significance, if any, is there in picking which choker Elizabeth wears in the beginning of the game?
there is no significance between choosing bird or cage.

there is significance in making the choice though. constants & variables.

there is also significance when you are drowned because the Elizabeths that show up at the end do not have a choker on.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,450
7
81
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.
But you are under the assumption that no one really believes. I have met "true believers", and their religion made less sense than basic Christianity. Within in the context of the story, Comstock didnt seem to regret anything. They went back and got Anna because he became sterile. If he wasnt, I dont think he would have gone back for her. Otherwise, I dont recall any instance where Comstock regretted his past. If anything, he embraced it.
 
Last edited:

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
The coin flip is always the same?

One time through that area Booker said "heads" and another time he said "tails" but I am not sure if it landed the same both times or not.
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
The coin flip is always the same?

One time through that area Booker said "heads" and another time he said "tails" but I am not sure if it landed the same both times or not.
It doesn't matter which one Booker chooses, the coin always lands on heads. The Luteces comment on that fact and the male Lutece even has a chalkboard strapped to his chest where you can see a few marks under the title "heads" while none are under "tails". As they walk to the side you can see another chalkboard is on his back where the entire left side is filled up under "heads". The marks total 122 not counting the one they mark that time. I think this is meant to drive home both the number of times Booker has attempted to rescue Elizabeth and Elizabeth's later comment about constants and variables.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,074
126
One of my annoyances with this game is the number of things it introduces as one offs (like using the shock power to power up the gondola and a few other items right in the vacinity) There were a few others as well that was like..what was the point of "this" because it was of no use for the rest of the game.

What was the deal with what the Handymen were always yelling? Things like "stop", "why are you doing this to me" etc. These were the first indicators to me about how Comstock was.
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
One of my annoyances with this game is the number of things it introduces as one offs (like using the shock power to power up the gondola and a few other items right in the vacinity) There were a few others as well that was like..what was the point of "this" because it was of no use for the rest of the game.

What was the deal with what the Handymen were always yelling? Things like "stop", "why are you doing this to me" etc. These were the first indicators to me about how Comstock was.
Yeah that annoyed me too. I'm used to a game mechanic sticking around for the rest of the game after being introduced. There should have been more shock jockey doors and fewer lock pick doors. They could have had fun with the switch locations, placing them around corners, behind drapes, on the ceilings, in other rooms, etc. Missed opportunity there.

I don't think the game ever went into great detail about how the handymen were created. We knew basically everything about the big daddies in the first BioShock, so their actions made sense. I assume that the handymen were somehow not in control of their actions, but that's purely through what they say in combat. Stuff like "turn me off", and "I'm sorry" seems to indicate that they didn't necessarily want to be doing what they were doing .
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,776
4
0
Yeah that annoyed me too. I'm used to a game mechanic sticking around for the rest of the game after being introduced. There should have been more shock jockey doors and fewer lock pick doors. They could have had fun with the switch locations, placing them around corners, behind drapes, on the ceilings, in other rooms, etc. Missed opportunity there.

I don't think the game ever went into great detail about how the handymen were created. We knew basically everything about the big daddies in the first BioShock, so their actions made sense. I assume that the handymen were somehow not in control of their actions, but that's purely through what they say in combat. Stuff like "turn me off", and "I'm sorry" seems to indicate that they didn't necessarily want to be doing what they were doing .
These are a couple of reasons Bioshock 1 > Bioshock Infinite

Game mechanics were given time and opportunity to become fully relevant. Big Daddies and other things like that were explained (not too much though) and Andrew Ryan was way cooler.
 

Qbah

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2005
3,754
10
81
When I saw Rapture I went WTF :D I didn't see it coming that DeWitt = Comstock. I thought Anna was his wife actually... and not his daughter. Even after you learn that Elizabeth is your daughter, I still thought he meant his wife when calling the name Anna. Why would he call an infant's name? It's not like it will reply to the call... The ending is sad though, the DeWitt you get to know dies/drowns - so the game events never happen. So it's even worse than death - he never existed, neither did Elizabeth... Also, he killed "himself" (or did he since those universes were wiped ;) )... and in a typical bioshock way, like in BS1 (the Andrew Ryan scene) - the player had no control over that...

All in all, a wonderful and sad story and one I will remember for a long time. I got the season pass so I wonder what DLC will show up. If it will be as great as Minerva's Den in BS2 - can't wait then! :D
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,074
126
I really doubt that is what happened. They figured out a way to connect Infinite to the rest. It's not that hard when you start talking time travel and multiple dimensions. Since it was their property, they could make it all fit as they wanted. I never even finished the other 2 and still loved the tie in. I knew immediately where I was when I stepped out into that room.

I liked the way they used the lighthouses, however since you could pretty much pick whichever one you wanted, kind of wish you could have had multiple endings based on the one you stepped through (or at least the abillity to breifly explore other related worlds).
 

mistercrabby

Senior member
Mar 9, 2013
963
53
91
I thought the tie-back to Rapture was way cool, too.

I think the Elizabeths and our timeline Booker realized the only way to end the cycle was to kill him before he was born-again and turned on the road to becoming Comstock. Sorry if i'm repeating previous posts.

As i think about the Elizabeths popping out of our time-line, after Booker is drowned, it shows them breaking that cycle and having a different life. I don't think it means they "die", I think they escape what others have pointed out as a destiny scenario, somehow influenced or observed by the Lutece's.

I think the question is did the Elizabeth's drown Booker before or after he gave Anna to Lutece? If before, then it presumes an entirely different timeline for Anna and Booker. If after, then Comstock is never instantiated, but Booker has previously given Anna to Lutece. But Comstock was there when Booker did. Thus, a conundrum.

Anybody see something that breaks that constraint?
 

Galatian

Senior member
Dec 7, 2012
372
0
71
From what I gathered handymen are normal persons who had an "accident" and to be able to save them in the hospital they had some pretty severe transplantations done.
Kinda like a Steampunk Adam Jenson...

I think there were several clues on that already from the beginning on.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,038
344
126
I thought the tie-back to Rapture was way cool, too.

I think the Elizabeths and our timeline Booker realized the only way to end the cycle was to kill him before he was born-again and turned on the road to becoming Comstock. Sorry if i'm repeating previous posts.

As i think about the Elizabeths popping out of our time-line, after Booker is drowned, it shows them breaking that cycle and having a different life. I don't think it means they "die", I think they escape what others have pointed out as a destiny scenario, somehow influenced or observed by the Lutece's.

I think the question is did the Elizabeth's drown Booker before or after he gave Anna to Lutece? If before, then it presumes an entirely different timeline for Anna and Booker. If after, then Comstock is never instantiated, but Booker has previously given Anna to Lutece. But Comstock was there when Booker did. Thus, a conundrum.

Anybody see something that breaks that constraint?
I think after and the "prime" timeline was set right. So immediately around Booker everything reset in that timeline which is why at the end credits he was surprised to hear Anna in the room. He had already given her away in his timeline, but since things reset around him there she was since there would never be a Comstock to sell her to.

There are many different interpretations and I suppose that's what the developer wanted.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,038
344
126
One thing...where did the songbird come from? Who made it, what was it, and what was its purpose other than to get in your way and eventually help you out?
 

Dankk

Diamond Member
Jul 7, 2008
5,558
25
91
What significance, if any, is there in picking which choker Elizabeth wears in the beginning of the game?
I don't think there's any significance. I think it was just a cheap way for the game to try and make the player feel more attached to her, by having you pick the ornament she wears.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,038
344
126
I don't think there's any significance. I think it was just a cheap way for the game to try and make the player feel more attached to her, by having you pick the ornament she wears.
No significance to the story but it does have bearing on the theme of constants and variables. It's more symbolic than anything. Free as a bird or caged up.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
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 :)
Did you notice that Levine calls Baker "Booker" at the end of their duet. At least it sounds like he calls him Booker.
 

tygeezy

Senior member
Aug 28, 2012
300
14
81
I see how drowning the Booker that got baptized prevents him from becoming Comstock. However, our character is the Booker that rejected the baptism and is 20 years removed from that event. How does taking our character back to that scene change anything if he is a Booker so far removed from that event?
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,038
344
126
I see how drowning the Booker that got baptized prevents him from becoming Comstock. However, our character is the Booker that rejected the baptism and is 20 years removed from that event. How does taking our character back to that scene change anything if he is a Booker so far removed from that event?
There is always a parallel world in which he accepts it. There is always a Columbia. You have to break that cycle.
 

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
18
81
I see how drowning the Booker that got baptized prevents him from becoming Comstock. However, our character is the Booker that rejected the baptism and is 20 years removed from that event. How does taking our character back to that scene change anything if he is a Booker so far removed from that event?
At the end just before the Elizabeths reveal that he is both Comstock and Booker, Booker seems to forget who Elizabeth is. He says something like "Wait...You're not...Who are you?" That statement doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't Booker know who Elizabeth is? He had just gone on a grand adventure with her.

My theory is that not only did Elizabeth bring him to the baptism waters, but she actually made him turn into that previous Booker. Of course the Booker from 20 years ago wouldn't know who Elizabeth is. She wasn't born yet. I don't like that way of doing things though. I think what was happening would be clearer if perhaps she brought you back to that time and place, but instead of making you stand in for younger Booker, made you see the younger Booker already there. Perhaps you might even have to kill him yourself. That would be an crazy twist, and it would make it clear to the player what was going on. The morphing of you as older Booker into younger Booker with no further cues than his rather vague indication that he had forgotten who Elizabeth was is unsatisfying to me.
 

tygeezy

Senior member
Aug 28, 2012
300
14
81
At the end just before the Elizabeths reveal that he is both Comstock and Booker, Booker seems to forget who Elizabeth is. He says something like "Wait...You're not...Who are you?" That statement doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't Booker know who Elizabeth is? He had just gone on a grand adventure with her.

My theory is that not only did Elizabeth bring him to the baptism waters, but she actually made him turn into that previous Booker. Of course the Booker from 20 years ago wouldn't know who Elizabeth is. She wasn't born yet. I don't like that way of doing things though. I think what was happening would be clearer if perhaps she brought you back to that time and place, but instead of making you stand in for younger Booker, made you see the younger Booker already there. Perhaps you might even have to kill him yourself. That would be an crazy twist, and it would make it clear to the player what was going on. The morphing of you as older Booker into younger Booker with no further cues than his rather vague indication that he had forgotten who Elizabeth was is unsatisfying to me.
The problem I have with this theory is earlier you are brought to the baptism scene and reject the baptism yet again, but you still clearly remember Elizabeth. I agree, the ending is very sloppy and confusing. They established that Elizabeth and the twins with their machine could open up rifts to different universes and time periods, but their was no mention of being able to transform people into younger versions of themselves.

I think having all the Elizabeth's showing up and then you turning around and drowning the recently baptized Booker would have made MUCH more sense.

When you add time travel and parallel universes to a story line there will always be some sort of plot hole in my opinion unless the laws of time travel are well established. We leave it up to the writer to establish these laws in their science fiction, but none of that was even explained to us. In fact, they didn't bother to explain a lot of things or leave enough clues.

How the hell did Comstock get so rich anyway? He was able to fork enough dough over to invest in technology that could create time rifts and build a giant floating city. Meanwhile poor ole Booker is as poor as a church mouse and needs to sell his baby to cover his gambling debts to a much richer version of himself.:hmm:
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY