Forums: Index > Watercooler > Known Issues and Contradictions in Bioshock Infinite's Plot

With such a large and complex plot, such as the one in BioShock Infinite, many narrative contradictions and issues with the plot can exist. This page is dedicated to listing, describing, and discussing these issues. (As this is a forum post, rather than a page on the main article space, feel free to edit this with any of your own ideas, regardless of evidence or speculation).





Contents show]

Contradictions in how trans-timeline travel is handled Edit

As the majority of the game takes place in the Booker A (Comstock) timeline with the player controlling Booker B, the assumption must be made that one person can exist as two separate entities inside of a singular universe without any paradoxes forming (even though Comstock knows that Booker is himself from an alternate universe, which would, according to the modern definition of the multiverse, cause some issues regarding universal integrity; but this will be set aside as simply a function of the way the multiverse works in the game). This implies that it is the norm is for the B version of a person to exist alongside the A version. In other words: one version of a person that is brought into a universe with another version of the same person exists simply as a being separate from their inter-universal counterpart, rather than taking their place and slowly acquiring their memories as information is given to them (which would be the only other logical thing to happen when a person enters a universe where they already exist). This actively contradicts the last few minutes of the game where Booker enters the earlier version of his own timeline as a passive participant, but replacing the version of himself before he went to Booker A's dimension. This could be explained as him simply experiencing things that he already has, but with Elizabeth there as well. The final scene before the credits is where the real issue lies, as Booker B travels to Booker A's dimension, replaces him, and then dies in his place. This seemingly contradicts the way the rest of the game handles the same situation.









Issues in the plot that are not answered/adressed Edit

After Booker B and Elizabeth A (the Elizabeth from Booker A's universe and the Elizabeth that you are with for most of the game) travel through the tear into the universe where the Vox Populi were winning the "war" between them and the Founders. It is learned that the Booker from this timeline (Booker C) died as a martyr to the Vox cause, it is discovered via a Voxophone that Elizabeth B (the Elizabeth from this universe) had been taken to Comstock House before Booker got a chance to rescue her from her Monument Island. This is never addressed in the story, and it carries the implication that for the remainder of the game there are two Elizabeths in existence in what becomes the primary universe in which the second half of the game is set. This further means that in the timeline where Booker doesn't rescue Elizabeth there are two versions of her existing for decades in the same universe, which would have severe phsical effects (e.g. continued dimensional deterioration; Tears).





I remember it being mentioned that those Elizabeth's warped together, thus rendering them the same. Roosevelt the Hunter (talk) 10:55, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

Slate not realizing that Booker and Comstock are the same Edit

During the events at the Hall of Heroes, Cornelius Slate often talks about the fact that Booker was at Wounded Knee. He gets angry at the fact that Comstock claims to have been at the battle. In one of the voxophones in the Hall of Heroes, Slate even says that he and his men referred to DeWitt as the "White Injun". This implies that Slate knew Booker on a personal, or at least professional, level during his time in the army. Where the issue lies in this is the fact, though Booker A (Baptized Comstock) changed his name, his physical appearance wasn't changed until he and the Luteces started working with multiverse travel. There would naturally be propaganda or statues around Columbia that were made before Comstock aged prematurely, and it would make sense that, as a member of the Founders, Slate would have seen these. It is strange that he doesn't recognize Comstock for DeWitt, just because he has a different name.

Actually there are some hints that Slate DOES know that Comstock was DeWitt. He just no longer considers Comstock to be that person anymore. --Solarmech (talk) 15:32, January 30, 2015 (UTC)





It's more probable that he had no knowlegde of the fact that Booker had become Comstock in that universe, as he recognizes the player character as Booker Dewitt and Comstock as having no military record period. It would seem odd if he knew the two were the same, as he says his anger with Comstock is the fact that he was not a soldier but portrayed himself as a participant of both Wounded Knee and the Boxer Rebellion. Further, he seems to draw memory about specifically Booker Dewitt in A Soldier's Death Voxophone. His lines in the Hall of Heroes also more seem to indirectlly forshadow the eventual revelation over him actually knowing, such as saying Comstock pretends to be as noble as Booker. Roosevelt the Hunter (talk) 10:47, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

He probably couldn't tell, they look different enough.(Kelis98 (talk) 21:45, August 27, 2018 (UTC))

Grandfather Paradox (Debatable, as this takes place in multiple timelines) Edit

The baptism at the end and Booker's sacrifice nullifies all of the events of game, meaning that the sacrifice would never happen--a classic grandfather paradox. Because Comstock was never baptised, Booker would not have gone to Columbia, meaning that he would never have been taken back by Elizabeth to make the sacrifice, meaning Comstock would have been baptised--meaning Comstock would never have been baptised, etc. Not to mention that, at the final scene after the credits, it is implied that Anna was never taken, meaning that Elizabeth never was, meaning that the sacrifice was never made and Comstock was baptised, etc.

Booker makes his choice before Anna is concieved, thus, Elizebeth (Anna) COULD NOT go back in time and kill her own father as it would prevent her from existing in the first place. Additionally, taking (A random version of) Booker (at the end of the game) back to the past and killing him wouldnt work as he already exists in the past. You cannot take a person from the present back to the past and kill the present version there; The past version (who had yet to decide about baptisim) would have to be killed, which would negate all of the events in the game from possibly happening.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.4.228.228 (talk • contribs) 21:18, January 29, 2015 (UTC). Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.

Elizabeth does cause a Grandfather Paradox, no doubt abut that. But in the BSI Universe, everything happens at once. The same time Booker is going to Columbia, he is also at the Baptism, getting drunk in NYC, at Wounded Knee etc. To "fix" the paradox, the decision that would ultimately create the paradox, Booker accepting the Baptism and becoming Comstock are erased and things are reset. Booker's decision to reject the Baptism becomes a Constant not a variable. And that is why he end up back in 1893. sm --Solarmech (talk) 15:38, January 30, 2015 (UTC)

-

Unfortunately, the WHOLE set of Quantum Theories are BASED on there being NO CONSTANTS in a Quantum Based Universe (of Universes in that particular Multiverse theory) on the Micro or Macro scale. It really doesn't matter what Elizabeth/Levine thinks... 75.36.139.83 22:24, October 18, 2015 (UTC)





The whole Grandfather Paradox is just one way of looking at it. Since the game goes into both alternate dimensions and timelines, something that had existed can still exist at one point. While Columbia was erased from existance, as without Comstock it would never be built, it can still technically exist since there was a time before all Comstocks were erased. Elizabeth's powers gained through existing in another universe at the same time seems to somewhat mirror how the Lutece twins do the same but exist within different dimensions. Taking this into account, while the other Elizabeths seen drowning Booker faded away, she was uniquely able to maintain existance like the Luteces due to being able to essentially warp reality.

In that sense, all remaining Elizabeth's who managed to gain full control over their powers (there is another version seen with a Booker at the Sea of Doors) can likely still exist due to that power. However, this is massively contradicted in Burial at Seas Episode 2. As after that Elizabeth dies, the Luteces somehow bring another Elizabeth back to Rapture, though this one does not possess powers. This is strange figuring the last Elizabeth would have to have powers since only the one who had powers continued to exist. That part, I don't think has an explaination other than the fact it was just a way to have Elizabeth shoehorned into the plot of the first game's prior events. Roosevelt the Hunter (talk) 06:50, August 30, 2018 (UTC)