Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
P.S.
Also I'm not telling that everything that mentioned guys say is true, they have just theories but still, they have science degree, alot of experienvce and knowledge so saying that their ideas are ridiculus by someone who probably has no knowledge in this area is kinda silly
My degree is in philosophy, and I took metaphysics, which happens to be what we're talking about. Metaphysics is not a science course per say, though it does involve science. You're making a poor assumption in assuming I think the notion of alternate dimensions is impossible. I never said that. I said that predicating the existence of those dimensions on human choice is asinine but is also a premise I was willing to accept for the purpose of playing the game. I should have known when they did the coin-tossing that I'd be displeased with the end of the game. How much human choice goes into a coin toss? Do you choose to flip the coin a certain way? Did you make a choice previously in which you hurt your right hand, so instead you use your left one? Doesn't the exact spot you're standing in determine how high you toss it? Do you find another way in and avoid the coin toss? Does a person always call "heads?" or does something that happens during the day make them sometimes call "tails?" Do you, personally, always call "heads," no matter what? All kinds of things can affect the outcome of a coin toss. They implicitly broke their own rule right off the bat, so I shouldn't be surprised that they'd do it again. (Though you could argue that there is certainly some dimensional set where, purely by chance, he hits heads every single time. That really defeats the point of the scene though.)
Tyson says this about time travel: “Normally when you set up the rules and regulations of some branch of science, it's because you've done the experiments to see how nature behaves when you poke it, prod it, put it in a petri dish. So as far as we know, we have no time travel experience other than being prisoners of the present, forever transitioning from the past into the future.”
“So that being said,” he added, “there are some leading thinkers among us, Stephen Hawking counted in this, who have hypothesized a time-travel rule. They want to put it in to avoid paradox: You cannot travel back in time and interact with the world that created you that enabled you to travel back in time. In other words, ‘The Terminator’ scenario would not be possible because it would create an unresolvable paradox.”
http://www.thewrap.com/neil-degrasse-tyson-cant-rule-out-x-men-time-travel/
So there's your guys for you. They have their own problem with it. However, their issues are handled in the DLC (sorta). My issue is not.
"There's nothing compelling us to believe time has more dimensions, but wouldn't that be cool?" - Tyson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvKuEgzElec
That's not really a position I'd cite on the subject.
Eepblock gets it.
Killing Comstock before he ever lived can happen, and there will be infinite universes where that is true. But there will be an equal number of universes in which the decision not to do so results in that not happening. Remember Elizabeth asking Booker if he's sure before they end up at the pond? That's a choice. By their own rules, that means dimensions in which Booker chose otherwise branched off from that point, whether they realized it or not.
Well, the ending made sense to me. Even if there was a booker who declined the drowning, there will still be at least one who will go along with it and that action will cancel out all the realities where Comstock existed. Also, ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Burial at Sea.
You forgot something. While your decisions (Variables) in the Bioshock Universe create alternate realities, they don't always do so. Some decisions do NOT make alternate realities or while you have a choice, you will ALWAYS take one and not the other because of the person you are. That is the point of the Constants. Booker at the end of BSI made a decision that was a Constant. He, in theory, could have said no and lived. But because of the person he was, he never would so and the posibility of Cmstock was removed from reality. Another Constant is his choosing the ball with 77 on it, but it's Booker's choice what to do with it.
So free will and morality is very much intact. sm
(It’s like a story. Two people can tell the exact same story, or one person can change his version. In both cases there are two stories.)
Comstock is different than other men because he travels between universes and his choices therefore have a far greater impact. Killing the man that would become Comstock will prevent him from travelling between universes.
---
Let’s say I have a choice of taking two different routes two work. Most of the times my choice won’t impact the universe I’m in by much, since there are so many variables. If there is a universe in which choice B means I’ll die in traffic, society as a whole isn’t likely to change.
But if the father of Genghis Khan had made the choice to drink with his friends instead of visiting his wife on the night Genghis was conceived our history would be completely different.
For example: no Mongol invasion of Russia, no Mongol taxation on Russia, no Russian princes who suppress farmers to pay those taxes, a less autocratic government in Russia, hundredths of years later no Russian revolution, no Stalin, no Cold War and no Iron Curtain et cetera.
But even though Genghis Khan had a massive impact on history, he hasn’t changed the fabric of our universe. He was still one man (albeit with a lot of descendants) and his choices weren’t all encompassing.
Comstock however does exactly that. He changes the fabric of our universe by using elements that are foreign to the universe he is in to create his own reality.
What determines Constant's and Variables in the BSI world is not totaly know at this point. But Varaibles tend to be the situations where there is a real choice between two options. (Even if one is wrong). Booker at the Baptism was a very troubled person and so the decision to become Comstock was a vaible choice to him at the time. The Booker that rejected the Baptism also took a viable choice.
To qoute Andrew Ryan, "We all make choices, but in the end our choices make us." And that is why the Booker we play as is such a different person than Comstock. The choice he made sent him on a much different path than Cosmtock, and he could never go back (and would not want to).
Now one thing that determines a Constant in choice is if it is a viable (realistic) choice. As you are reading this, everyone single person on the planet has a choice. To try and kill the next person they see or don't try. Clearly few people do try and kill the next person they see and that is because the choice is not a viable on based on their personality. If this choice resulted in a 50/50 split in realities, half the human race would be trying to kill the first person they see. They aren't, so that means it is a constant that most people will not choose to try and kill the next person they see because it is not a viable choice. Hope that makes sense. sm
This is known as the gambler's fallacy. For all you know, we're living in one of the infinite universes in which this hasn't happened. It may very well be common in another infinite number of universes. Or it could start happening tomorrow in this one. 50/50 means nothing when applied to infinity.
CommanderLeopard, "The Sea of Doors" is what I have a problem with the most. It strikes me as nonsensical for her to ask Booker if he's sure he wants to go through with something if he doesn't actually have a choice in the matter. And I'm not sure the point at which he made that decision was actually done within The Sea of Doors. It was at the lighthouse from the beginning of the game as I recall.
Rafael, how can a universe in which Choice B is made "already exist" without someone making Choice B instead of Choice A? If the choice itself is the defining characteristic of that universe, does not some version of the decision maker have to actually make that choice? We're really not talking about infinite universes at all once we get into time travel though, are we? For what they did to have any meaning, we're talking about branching universes, which although large in number would not be infinite. Otherwise, universes in which Comstock is still roaming about must exist, regardless of choice. This notion that there is such thing as one reality in which I say A vs. some other reality in which I say B makes no sense to me. I am the sum of my parts, as are all of us. Your response can be only what it is.
I guess, all said, we have to swallow the pill that it's human choice that determines the existence of these other dimensions in the game. Which means for me, it's the whole notion of other dimensions that I never wanted to buy into to begin with. Not so much the ending, as the plot. The only way I can believe another dimension exists would be due to time travel itself. Otherwise, choice and destiny are one and the same.
I never had this issue with, for instance, Soul Reaver's time travel as either a hard determinist or a compatibilist because it denies free will as being anything other than equivalent with "the only way it could be."
"Free will is an illusion." - Kain
A) Drowns the Bookers that all went to the baptism therefore cutting off any chance of a Comstock ever existing and the mini-scene after the credits could be a booker that never even bothered to go to a baptism
B) Drowned only the Bookers that would have became Comstock leaving the Bookers we know alive in well back in their own realities
Who's to say the game doesn't exactly clarify which scenario we could be viewing at the end credits but no matter what Booker does seem to get the chance to raise Anna.
EDIT: I did forget to mention that the other Elizabeths most likely vanished after Booker's drowning either from them fading from reality or returning back to their own. Hard to say as the Elizabeth we know is still there and DLC. It's obvious her powers are so great she can manipulate her own existance or all known realities wash around her without anything affecting her besides being injured by a source.
Makes me think of the Living Tribunal or One-Above-All. No where near the same powers but this scenario just make me think of them.
*Spoilers for Bioshock Infinite and Burial at Sea.*
I also think that when Elizabeth is taking Booker on his final journey through the Sea of Doors, She is acting like the ferryman.
Also, the Lutece’s ferry Elizabeth to her final destination in BaS Ep 2.
But at the end of Infinite at the final door, when Liz asked Booker whether he was sure that he wanted to go thought with this. I think it was because she knew that she would be alone again in the multiverse. And perhaps Liz had already seen her future without Booker and the events of Burial at Sea.
The ghostly Elizabeth’s in the water are presumably the Elizabeth’s who have already bought the farm. I think that Liz didn’t just see the demise of one Elizabeth… She potentially saw the demise of every Elizabeth.