BioShock Infinite thread VII: I appreciate a lady, who appreciates value! - Games

[QUOTE=Winters;40145233]It's a different game from Bioshock 1 that's plot is not even on the same scope. CAn you blame it for being written differently?[/QUOTE] No of course not but I can blame it for trying to incorporate "bigger" metaphysical concepts and sacrificing the witt (DeWitt, ha!) and smartness and symbolism of the first one by doing so. The writing is less elegant.

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145273]No of course not but I can blame it for trying to incorporate "bigger" metaphysical concepts and sacrificing the witt (DeWitt, ha!) and smartness and symbolism of the first one by doing so. The writing is less elegant.[/QUOTE] I disagree whole heartedly.

[QUOTE=Winters;40145265]Because that's how constants work yo[/QUOTE] That's not an answer. You can't just randomly decide "Hey okay so for a good story this stuff is constant and this stuff is not". When the game introduces a concept of "certain stuff is subject to change in certain universes" it does need to allow the questions about what is subject to change and why one thing and not the other. That's how theories and human search for knowledge works. The rules have to stand up to their implications.

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145302]When the game introduces a concept of "certain stuff is subject to change in certain universes" it does need to allow the questions about what is subject to change and why one thing and not the other. That's how theories and human search for knowledge works. The rules have to stand up to their implications.[/QUOTE] [sp]Alright, I'm sorry the game does not go out and explain to you what exactly is subject to change. I just figured you'd be happy with an omnipotent god woman saying that this will fix everything considering you know she can see every timeline at once. That should be implication enough that this is the end all for comstock timelines.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145190]In Infinite the concepts of Columbia: race pride, religion, history glorification, tin god worshiping. They are pretty disconnected from the story.[/QUOTE] all of the themes, while disconnected from the whole, presented motivation for different parties who directly affected how you progressed through the story. So, racism and social class imbalance wasn't solved nor did it have anything to do with you or your own concerns, but going on a side-quest to [sp]help the Vox start their revolution by arming them, if only for your personal gain (getting the airship) changes the balance of Columbia- instead of cops chasing you down, you're suddenly caught in the middle of a street-war, Columbia is getting torn apart at the seams so more weaponry and cover is deployed around, and the vox now hate you because in this universe they think you're some imposter, since in that universe you presumably died in the process of getting their weapons. speaking of the vox martyrdom, it's kind of open ended as to how you became a martyr. a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value and think the other you was like a leader and a heroic figure within the vox, but really it could have been a similar timeline and you either died in the process of getting weapons, or maybe the rebel lady just decided she wanted to keep the airship for herself and kicked you out the door, using your name and a sob story to rally the people[/sp]

[QUOTE=daijitsu;40145357][sp]speaking of the vox martyrdom, it's kind of open ended as to how you became a martyr. a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value and think the other you was like a leader and a heroic figure within the vox, but really it could have been a similar timeline and you either died in the process of getting weapons, or maybe the rebel lady just decided she wanted to keep the airship for herself and kicked you out the door, using your name and a sob story to rally the people[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]There is a voxaphone of Booker's last moments and he doesn't make any mention of Daisy killing him[/sp]

[QUOTE=Winters;40145379][sp]There is a voxaphone of Booker's last moments and he doesn't make any mention of Daisy killing him[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]He says "maybe I did right by the Vox" so I don't think they betrayed him[/sp]

[video=youtube;vY_Ry8J_jdw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY_Ry8J_jdw[/video] They really should have included or referenced this at the end of the game.

I got a question, are there any good/bad endings? If so, what should i do to get good/bad ending? Please dont spoil anything though.

[QUOTE=Lefter;40145598]I got a question, are there any good/bad endings? If so, what should i do to get good/bad ending? Please dont spoil anything though.[/QUOTE] There's only one ending. Nothing you do affects it.

[QUOTE=daijitsu;40145357]all of the themes, while disconnected from the whole, presented motivation for different parties who directly affected how you progressed through the story. [/quote] Well of course some motivation needs to be present. There needs to be conflict, crisis and resolution. That'sstory writing 101. And I'm not denying that, of course it was a great canvas to paint the story of Booker and Elizabeth on. I'm just saying that this canvas is less elegant this time because while it does a good job at keeping the story in movement, it doesn't really add any deeper meaning to it by reflecting, distorting or exagerating. Bioshock 1 did that. If you'll allow me to use a hyperbole: Most well known pieces from Banksy make much more sense in their places, painted on a wall or pavement because the artwork(or story if we translate it to the game) is in relation to its medium(the world the story is happening in) They'd lose their deeper meaning if they were just printed out on a piece of paper. The paper does a good job at displaying the painting but it doesn't add to or substract from it. In BS1 the failed experiment of ultimate liberty failed in Rapture and the absolute liberty of the player to follow the story was always displayed but never there in the first place, would you kindly agree with that? In BS:I the religious racist republican extremists in the flying city sure provided a nice world but the main story doesn't really interfere or touch that. [quote] So, racism and social class imbalance wasn't solved nor did it have anything to do with you or your own concerns, but going on a side-quest to [sp]help the Vox start their revolution by arming them, if only for your personal gain (getting the airship) changes the balance of Columbia- instead of cops chasing you down, you're suddenly caught in the middle of a street-war, Columbia is getting torn apart at the seams so more weaponry and cover is deployed around, and the vox now hate you because in this universe they think you're some imposter, since in that universe you presumably died in the process of getting their weapons. speaking of the vox martyrdom, it's kind of open ended as to how you became a martyr. a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value and think the other you was like a leader and a heroic figure within the vox, but really it could have been a similar timeline and you either died in the process of getting weapons, or maybe the rebel lady just decided she wanted to keep the airship for herself and kicked you out the door, using your name and a sob story to rally the people[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Booker says something about remembering the fight he died in while leading the VP when he gets his nosebleeding[/sp] [editline]3rd April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=JesterUK;40145624]There's only one ending. Nothing you do affects it.[/QUOTE] At some points the game seems to be designed with multiple endings. The throw at the fair, Slate. Basically everything before we learn that [sp]Elizabeth is not just opening rips in time but also in dimensions[/sp]

[QUOTE=Funsize;40142674][IMG]http://puu.sh/2t4m8[/IMG][/QUOTE] [IMG]http://filesmelt.com/dl/ARE_YOU_A_BOOKER.png[/IMG] Alternative [IMG]http://filesmelt.com/dl/ARE_YOU_A_PARIS.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145237][sp]Then what limits these timelines? What about possible timelines where even worse stuff happens? For all we know it's decisions that create the timelines, ultimately reflected in the decision of Booker to take the Baptism or not (the very beginning of everything) and the decision of Booker to end Comstocks existence, the very end of everything. Why does every Baptism lead to Comstock? Why isn't there a timeline where he gets Baptized, comes back home and has a happy life?[/sp][/QUOTE] Sorry to go back here but, [sp]the game flat out tell you: Constants and variables.[/sp] [sp] Exhibit 1: Baptism - constant (this happens BEFORE you play the game) Outcome - variables: Booker rejects - creates Universe A (playable character) Booker accepts - creates Universe B (Comstock) There is NO other possible timelines, A or B happens and that's it. Exhibit 2: Collar choices - constant (every time you play, this will happen) Outcome - variables: Booker chooses cage - nothing significant happens Booker chooses bird - nothing significant happens There is NO other possible collar choices, it's either Cage or Bird. Now to answer our question, you did answer your own question. Decisions affects timelines and sometimes creates new ones. And no, baptism will ALWAYS lead to Comstock, didn't you see the 6 or 7 Elizabeths talking to you, all of those women are there because there are possible B universes that always happen, because he accepted the baptism. Since this is a variable, the only to make sure that Comstock does not exist to change the variable to a constant, like this: Exhibit 3: Baptism - constant (this happens BEFORE you play the game) Outcome: Booker rejects - continues Universe A, it's now a constant. Booker accepts but dies during - overwrites Universe B, it's now a constant. So after this, every time the rejects, he lives (now constant), and every time he accepts, he dies during (also constant), and the chain effect happens (no Comstock, no Columbia -> no reason to steal Uni-A Booker's daughter -> no reason to bring Uni-A Booker into the Uni-B). That's why this is a deconstruction of multiple endings and illusion of choices. [/sp]

[QUOTE=guicool-BR-;40145888]Sorry to go back here but, [sp]the game flat out tell you: Constants and variables.[/sp] [sp] Exhibit 1: Baptism - constant (this happens BEFORE you play the game) Outcome - variables: Booker rejects - creates Universe A (playable character) Booker accepts - creates Universe B (Comstock) There is NO other possible timelines, A or B happens and that's it. Exhibit 2: Collar choices - constant (every time you play, this will happen) Outcome - variables: Booker chooses cage - nothing significant happens Booker chooses bird - nothing significant happens There is NO other possible collar choices, it's either Cage or Bird. Now to answer our question, you did answer your own question. Decisions affects timelines and sometimes creates new ones. And no, baptism will ALWAYS lead to Comstock, didn't you see the 6 or 7 Elizabeths talking to you, all of those women are there because there are possible B universes that always happen, because he accepted the baptism. Since this is a variable, the only to make sure that Comstock does not exist to change the variable to a constant, like this: Exhibit 3: Baptism - constant (this happens BEFORE you play the game) Outcome: Booker rejects - continues Universe A, it's now a constant. Booker accepts but dies during - overwrites Universe B, it's now a constant. So after this, every time the rejects, he lives (now constant), and every time he accepts, he dies during (also constant), and the chain effect happens (no Comstock, no Columbia -> no reason to steal Uni-A Booker's daughter -> no reason to bring Uni-A Booker into the Uni-B). That's why this is a deconstruction of multiple endings and illusion of choices. [/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Why is there no other possible timelines? Just because they are not presented in the game? Can't we think further than just what we are presented? Why will the Baptism always lead to Comstock? Who decides that? What about other worlds? Why is the creation of Comstock and Invasion of New York worth preventing, but the world of Rapture is not? Elizabeth certainly has the power to do so.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145302]That's not an answer. You can't just randomly decide "Hey okay so for a good story this stuff is constant and this stuff is not". When the game introduces a concept of "certain stuff is subject to change in certain universes" it does need to allow the questions about what is subject to change and why one thing and not the other. That's how theories and human search for knowledge works. The rules have to stand up to their implications.[/QUOTE] [sp]The story focuses on Comstock's birth. All the other timelines don't matter. Let's pretend for a moment that there's one timeline in which Booker doesn't accept the baptism, but then the Lucetes go on to make quantum mechanic devices for Hitler, turning him into MegaHitler. Who cares? That's not important the story at hand, which is about Booker's and Comstock's timelines. What is subject to change doesn't matter. That's why it isn't addressed in the game.[/sp]

Just finished this game. I actually hadn't heard of Bioshock:infinite before, or at least not payed any attention to it. I just saw some cool screenshots from the game a few days ago and thought ''wow, this looks cool'' and tried it out, without knowing anything about what this game is about. Like I didnt even bother to watch any trailers :v: and holy shit was this an amazing experience. The ending blowed my mind and has left me thinking about this game for a long time. It gave me a similar effect as the ending of the walking dead, except less tears.

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145950][sp]Why is there no other possible timelines? Just because they are not presented in the game? Can't we think further than just what we are presented? Why will the Baptism always lead to Comstock? Who decides that? What about other worlds? Why is the creation of Comstock and Invasion of New York worth preventing, but the world of Rapture is not? Elizabeth certainly has the power to do so.[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Elizabeth can see all the timelines. She explains that there are no other timelines. Because he is reborn as Comstock EVERY TIME. Jesus man, did you even pay attention to the ending? It wasn't decided by someone; it was what Elizabeth saw when she was able to see every single timeline. Rapture isn't very important to the story at hand. Sure, it helped them create Vigors and Handymen, but once Comstock is gone, none of that happens. Not in any story that we know of, anyway. But the other timelines in which this happens is not important. If you are to assume every single possible timeline of any story involving multiple timelines, you would never have a good sci-fi story with timelines. You would have to address everything. But that's not possible from an artistic perspective.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40145627]Well of course some motivation needs to be present. There needs to be conflict, crisis and resolution. That's story writing 101. And I'm not denying that, of course it was a great canvas to paint the story of Booker and Elizabeth on. I'm just saying that this canvas is less elegant this time because while it does a good job at keeping the story in movement, it doesn't really add any deeper meaning to it by reflecting, distorting or exagerating. Bioshock 1 did that. If you'll allow me to use a hyperbole: Most well known pieces from Banksy make much more sense in their places, painted on a wall or pavement because the artwork(or story if we translate it to the game) is in relation to its medium(the world the story is happening in) They'd lose their deeper meaning if they were just printed out on a piece of paper. The paper does a good job at displaying the painting but it doesn't add to or substract from it. In BS1 the failed experiment of ultimate liberty failed in Rapture and the absolute liberty of the player to follow the story was always displayed but never there in the first place, would you kindly agree with that? In BS:I the religious racist republican extremists in the flying city sure provided a nice world but the main story doesn't really interfere or touch that. [sp]Booker says something about remembering the fight he died in while leading the VP when he gets his nosebleeding[/sp] [editline]3rd April 2013[/editline] At some points the game seems to be designed with multiple endings. The throw at the fair, Slate. Basically everything before we learn that [sp]Elizabeth is not just opening rips in time but also in dimensions[/sp][/QUOTE] The big, big, BIG difference between Bioshock 1 and Infinite is that [sp]the city is not the main character, Elizabeth is. The main story is not supposed to touch some of those particularities, because it's all about her. We could easily change Columbia to Rapture, to New York, to Rio de Janeiro, to Osaka, to any city ever, but the main story would be: 'Bring us the girl and wipe away the debt'. This sentence pretty much tells: Columbia is not the main focus, just a city to go to and to the job. [/sp] I understand that they missed a great opportunity to flesh out the Vox Populi, or even the Founders, [sp] but the main characters (Elizabeth and Booker) just don't to know them. They don't to be taking sides, maybe because they are too extreme for them, but they had enough of Columbia and just want to leave.[/sp] [editline]3rd April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Killuah;40145950][sp]Why is there no other possible timelines? Just because they are not presented in the game? Can't we think further than just what we are presented? Why will the Baptism always lead to Comstock? Who decides that? What about other worlds? Why is the creation of Comstock and Invasion of New York worth preventing, but the world of Rapture is not? Elizabeth certainly has the power to do so.[/sp][/QUOTE] Dude erm [sp]And no, baptism will ALWAYS lead to Comstock, didn't you see the 6 or 7 Elizabeths talking to you, all of those women are there because there are possible B universes that always happen, because he accepted the baptism. [/sp] Think about this (spoiler free explanation): you go to a candy store (constant) to get some but there are only two flavors and only one candy of each to choose (variables): Vanilla or Chocolate. You said this: [sp]Can't we think further than just what we are presented?[/sp] So you go to owner and asks: 'Is there any other flavors available?' The owner responds with: 'Nah son, only these two are left, make sure you pick the one you like most.' If you take the Vanilla one, it creates a Universe A, taking the Chocolate, creates Universe B. That's it. No more candy at the store, no other universes can be created. [sp]Also Rapture is a different universe, I suspect one without Comstock[/sp]

[QUOTE=wulfe8857;40146033][sp]Elizabeth can see all the timelines. She explains that there are no other timelines. Because he is reborn as Comstock EVERY TIME. Jesus man, did you even pay attention to the ending? It wasn't decided by someone; it was what Elizabeth saw when she was able to see every single timeline.[/sp] [/quote] [sp] I know that but why is he reborn as Comstock every time? If taking the baptism and becoming Comstock FOR SURE(following your logic here) is up to Bookers decision, why is getting Baptized and NOT BECOMING COMSTOCK not up to the decision of Booker? [/sp] [quote] [sp]Rapture isn't very important to the story at hand. Sure, it helped them create Vigors and Handymen, but once Comstock is gone, none of that happens. Not in any story that we know of, anyway. But the other timelines in which this happens is not important. [/sp][/QUOTE] I really wish you guys would try to see this more abstract. [sp]Of course Rapture is not as important for what we are playing. But Anna has the power to prevent all of Comstock happening and does so. Why does she do it? What makes Comstock, in the greater sense, more important to prevent than lets say Rapture? She has the ultimate power, she basically is a goddess at the end of the game. She is all-knowing and omnipresent. What a selfish god she is. And that doesn't even tackle the multi-multiverses where Booker stands with her inbetween the million lighthouses and decides that he DOESN'T want to kill Comstock when she asks him[/sp] [sp][QUOTE]If you are to assume every single possible timeline of any story involving multiple timelines, you would never have a good sci-fi story with timelines. You would have to address everything. But that's not possible from an artistic perspective.[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Oh but it is. She'd see that a decision creates a new branch. And that even traveling the branches is its own branch and thus can be split into branches. And the consequence of that is that you can't make everything perfect, but as good as you can. And that trying to change history by changing decisions people made is futile, all you are doing is collapsing your personal branch to the good one and leaving the other branch. Ultimately she'd accept the great tragedy of human conscience and learn to live with it.[/sp]

Found another great post on NeoGAF: [sp]The ending makes perfect sense -- it's just been a matter of us all trying to explain it, in a clear and thorough way. I'd put it like this: Liz could manipulate time-space because part of her (the tip of her pinky finger) was in one universe, while the rest of her was in another. It's like she's standing on the border between worlds, one foot on each side, able to see both sides. To try and regulate this power, the siphon was created inside Monument Island, as a way to restrain her. Liz describes it as a "leash." Once the siphon is destroyed at the end of the game, she's "off the leash," and her power reaches its full potential. She can now see all of the infinite sets of timelines in the universe... including all of the ones in which Booker becomes Comstock. To prevent Comstock from ever happening, Liz has to create a PARADOX, because the universe "does not like its peas mixed with its porridge," as Lutece put it -- or in other words, nature will correct any paradoxes by obliterating paradoxical timelines from existence. So, Liz creates a paradox: She drowns Booker before his baptism. This creates a paradox because if Booker is dead, Booker can never become Comstock, and if Booker can never become Comstock, Comstock can never steal Liz, and if Liz is never stolen, Liz never receives her ability to traverse time-space and kill Booker in the first place. The universe sees this and goes, "PARADOX!" And then obliterates each and every timeline where Booker becomes Comstock. All that remains, are the timelines where Booker rejects baptism. What was once a "variable" -- an element that can change, in this case to accept or reject baptism -- is now a "constant," like the coin that always comes up heads when the Lutece twins meet Booker again at the Raffle Fair and ask him to flip the coin. That's an important concept to understand. There are constants -- elements that always work out the same across all timelines -- and variables, or things that are different depending on the timeline. Elizabeth, by creating a paradox, forced the universe to take the "variable" of accepting/rejecting baptism, and turn it into the "constant" of rejection. And so Booker, while still in debt, will be able to see his daughter grow up. And hopefully things will work out for the best.[/sp] Link: [url]http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=52533942&postcount=1618[/url]

[QUOTE=guicool-BR-;40146046] [sp]And no, baptism will ALWAYS lead to Comstock, didn't you see the 6 or 7 Elizabeths talking to you, all of those women are there because there are possible B universes that always happen, because he accepted the baptism. [/sp] [/quote] [sp]Why will it always lead to Comstock[/sp] [quote] Think about this (spoiler free explanation): you go to a candy store (constant) to get some but there are only two flavors and only one candy of each to choose (variables): Vanilla or Chocolate. You said this: [sp]Can't we think further than just what we are presented?[/sp] So you go to owner and asks: 'Is there any other flavors available?' The owner responds with: 'Nah son, only these two are left, make sure you pick the one you like most.' If you take the Vanilla one, it creates a Universe A, taking the Chocolate, creates Universe B. That's it. No more candy at the store, no other universes can be created. [sp]Also Rapture is a different universe, I suspect one without Comstock[/sp][/QUOTE] What about the universe where I ask the owner where the other flavours are? What about the universe where I leave the shop because I don't like chocolate and vanilla? Why do I have to chose in this particular shop? [sp] Why can Booker only become Comestock by Baptism? [/sp] All you're saying so far is "because the game says so" and it doesn't even say so. [sp]it just shows the 6 Elizabeths where Booker became Comstock by Baptism. What about possible universes where Booker does not become Comstock by Baptism after he takes it? Obviously the Elizabeths of THESE wouldn't need to prevent the Baptism and also wouldn't have the power to do so[/sp]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40146194][sp] I know that but why is he reborn as Comstock every time? If taking the baptism and becoming Comstock FOR SURE(following your logic here) is up to Bookers decision, why is getting Baptized and NOT BECOMING COMSTOCK not up to the decision of Booker? [/sp] I really wish you guys would try to see this more abstract. [sp]Of course Rapture is not as important for what we are playing. But Anna has the power to prevent all of Comstock happening and does so. Why does she do it? What makes Comstock, in the greater sense, more important to prevent than lets say Rapture? She has the ultimate power, she basically is a goddess at the end of the game. She is all-knowing and omnipresent. What a selfish god she is. And that doesn't even tackle the multi-multiverses where Booker stands with her inbetween the million lighthouses and decides that he DOESN'T want to kill Comstock when she asks him[/sp] [sp]Oh but it is. She'd see that a decision creates a new branch. And that even traveling the branches is its own branch and thus can be split into branches. And the consequence of that is that you can't make everything perfect, but as good as you can. And that trying to change history by changing decisions people made is futile, all you are doing is collapsing your personal branch to the good one and leaving the other branch. Ultimately she'd accept the great tragedy of human conscience and learn to live with it.[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]Rapture was just fanservice, only to make sure that her point was getting across ('A city on the bottom of the ocean? Ridiculous.') Also Rapture didn't attack anyone, Columbia attacked NY in 1983/84.[/sp] [quote]And that doesn't even tackle the multi-multiverses where Booker stands with her inbetween the million lighthouses and decides that he DOESN'T want to kill Comstock when she asks him[/sp][/quote] [sp]Impossible. Booker find out only the LAST moment that he was Comstock, choosing to not die there would lead to a loop in space-time, so in 20 years, another Booker would appear in Columbia, and that Booker who didn't want to kill himself to become Comstock, would become Comstock.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40146288] [sp] Why can Booker only become Comestock by Baptism? [/sp] All you're saying so far is "because the game says so" and it doesn't even say so. [sp]it just shows the 6 Elizabeths where Booker became Comstock by Baptism. What about possible universes where Booker does not become Comstock by Baptism? Obviously the Elizabeths of THESE wouldn't need to prevent the Baptism and also wouldn't have the power to do so[/sp][/QUOTE] I understand what you're saying. Because in a "world" with infinite universes [sp]Booker could become Comstock in infinite ways, since we have infinite universes we got infinite possibilities etc...[/sp]. But in this instance it really is "because the game said so", I don't know how much thought the developers intended us to put into the ending.

I understand what you are arguing Killuah, but I think the "constants and variables" are the game's excuse for not being so overly complex with the [sp]infinite possibilities where every situation that nobody has ever thought of, would happen anyway. If the game were to go literal with the infinite possibilities, there would be no way to end the game properly.[/sp] It makes sense not to look into the ending that far, even if it defies the logic the game set. Again, the "constants and variables" are the way for the game to make its own rules if you will. Swebonny summed it up.

[QUOTE=guicool-BR-;40146271]Found another great post on NeoGAF: [sp]The ending makes perfect sense -- it's just been a matter of us all trying to explain it, in a clear and thorough way. I'd put it like this: Liz could manipulate time-space because part of her (the tip of her pinky finger) was in one universe, while the rest of her was in another. It's like she's standing on the border between worlds, one foot on each side, able to see both sides. To try and regulate this power, the siphon was created inside Monument Island, as a way to restrain her. Liz describes it as a "leash." Once the siphon is destroyed at the end of the game, she's "off the leash," and her power reaches its full potential. She can now see all of the infinite sets of timelines in the universe... including all of the ones in which Booker becomes Comstock. To prevent Comstock from ever happening, Liz has to create a PARADOX, because the universe "does not like its peas mixed with its porridge," as Lutece put it -- or in other words, nature will correct any paradoxes by obliterating paradoxical timelines from existence. So, Liz creates a paradox: She drowns Booker before his baptism. This creates a paradox because if Booker is dead, Booker can never become Comstock, and if Booker can never become Comstock, Comstock can never steal Liz, and if Liz is never stolen, Liz never receives her ability to traverse time-space and kill Booker in the first place. The universe sees this and goes, "PARADOX!" And then obliterates each and every timeline where Booker becomes Comstock. All that remains, are the timelines where Booker rejects baptism. What was once a "variable" -- an element that can change, in this case to accept or reject baptism -- is now a "constant," like the coin that always comes up heads when the Lutece twins meet Booker again at the Raffle Fair and ask him to flip the coin. That's an important concept to understand. There are constants -- elements that always work out the same across all timelines -- and variables, or things that are different depending on the timeline. Elizabeth, by creating a paradox, forced the universe to take the "variable" of accepting/rejecting baptism, and turn it into the "constant" of rejection. And so Booker, while still in debt, will be able to see his daughter grow up. And hopefully things will work out for the best.[/sp] Link: [url]http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=52533942&postcount=1618[/url][/QUOTE] What about universes where other variables lead to the same constants? Also that would mean that, from a "before baptism" multiverse point of view, the baptism is still not decided. And when it comes to it, it would be a variable again since the universe never had a reason to make it a constant because from the outer view(ours), a paradox never needed to happen because there was a paradox created by Elizabeth and so on and so on...

Also a funny thing, if we have an infinite amount of universes. Getting from universe A to universe B would require infinite steps, since there always are an infinite number of universes in between.

[QUOTE=SirKillsAlot;40146371]I understand what you are arguing Killuah, but I think the "constants and variables" are the game's excuse for not being so overly complex with the [sp]infinite possibilities where every situation that nobody has ever thought of, would happen anyway. If the game were to go literal with the infinite possibilities, there would be no way to end the game properly.[/sp] It makes sense not to look into the ending that far, even if it defies the logic the game set. Again, the "constants and variables" are the way for the game to make its own rules if you will. Swebonny summed it up.[/QUOTE] There would be ways to end it but they would be very tragic, they would be endings where we, depite having the power to change our decisions, would still have to live with them, because changing them would also come with the knowledge of universes where we didn't change them.

[quote][sp]Why does she do it? What makes Comstock, in the greater sense, more important to prevent than lets say Rapture? She has the ultimate power, she basically is a goddess at the end of the game. She is all-knowing and omnipresent. What a selfish god she is.[/sp][/quote] you do have a point, but at the same time it still makes sense. [sp]For one, if she can see all possible outcomes, who's to say that rapture happening is the best outcome for that timeline? Rapture doesn't leave the sea to destroy major cities, it just kind of festers in its own (literal) bubble. And what place is it for her to go out of her way and fix all of the problems of every universe? She's fixing the paradox that created this neverending loop- this ideally prevents the Luteces from ever creating the universal tears, preventing any possible paradox. Every universe will run its course, but it should not be allowed to have several interfere with the timelines of others.[/sp] Also to whoever mentioned earlier, [sp]rapture's lighthouse isn't -the- hub, it's just another point in the sea of hubs. Elizabeth just knew how to port to a point in rapture which was near the bathysphere, to which you could go up to the surface and travel from there.[/sp]

[QUOTE=Swebonny;40146394]Also a funny thing, if we have an infinite amount of universes. Getting from universe A to universe B would require infinite steps, since there always are an infinite number of universes in between.[/QUOTE] Not really. Don't fall for the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise]tortoise paradox[/url]

[QUOTE=Killuah;40146441]Not really. Don't fall for the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise"]tortoise paradox[/URL][/QUOTE] I don't think it can be applied. If we imagine we can't straight jump from universe 0 to universe 1. But have to take 1 discrete step at a time. to reach universe 1. How many steps are you going to take? [editline]3rd April 2013[/editline] (hint there are no discrete steps) Edit: [B]OH I [/B]understand what you mean. But there are still infinite universes in between.