Poll: Half-Life 2 vs. Bioshock Infinite

[BlackBark]

I actually found Bioshock: Infinite to be quite a disappointment, compared with the original. The whole game feels very lazy to me, both in terms of story telling and gameplay. I don't even see why they bothered to set it in a city in the sky when most of the levels are set indoors. At least the original merged the world with the story, creating a unique atmosphere. I feel that BI really is a failure in this regard.

Also, I don't really see why people are praising voice recordings so much. That is just a very lazy way to tell parts of the story, without having to work the characters into the actual gameplay. You just happen to find recordings detailing their past actions and thoughts.

Aside from this, I just didn't like BI's story. The way the game presented the idea of multiple worlds just didn't work very well. It's full of paradoxes and kind of makes everything that you do feel like a complete waste of time, considering Elizabeth basically controls the fabrics of existence.

Anyway, for the record, I don't dislike the method of storytelling BI uses, I just think it is inferior to that which HL2 uses.

After playing through both Bioshock and Half Life 2 (including it's episodes) I have to say... (puts on flame retardant shield)

I just don't see any appeal in Half-Life 2's story. It's mostly because, well, it barely even has a story. It has a plot, but even that is minimal. All I know about the story of Half-Life 2 is "Gordon Freeman fights combine because of reasons."

Seriously, I have never seen a rhyme or reason for almost anything in the game. "Why are we trying to kill Breen?" "Because reasons." "Why do people see me as some kind of chosen one?" "Because reasons." "Why did Gordon agree to any of this?" "Because reasons."

Half-Life 2's "plot" is heavily reactant and dependent on circumstance. Freeman doesn't seem to go anywhere for a reason, but simply because he fell into the place. You're told, essentially, to go kill Breen and given a suit, and from then on you're just running from place to place and later you go "Oh what a coincidence, I ended up in Breen's tower."

A lot of people like to say Half-Life 2 had a good story, when in reality all it really had was good character interaction. You will rarely hear people talk about any aspects of the story they like when commenting on it's story, but you'll sure as hell hear people talk about how much they enjoyed Alyx and Dog. The plot itself doesn't seem to matter at all, it could have been anything, even a Romero style Zombie Apocalypse, and as long as the character interaction was good that is what would be mentioned. I didn't hate Breen, I didn't even see him as a villain, I just had a "meh" attitude towards him. I felt there was absolutely no motivation for anything in the game; I barely sympathized with the rebels simply because they seemed more like rebels without a cause than anything else.

At least Bioshock Infinite gave it's character, and the player, a motivation. There was a purpose to go from place to place (first it's to get Elizabeth, then it's to escape with Elizabeth) and there was a very clear reason to work with Elizabeth. I just don't see any kind of story in Half-Life 2, at all.

I agree with some of what you are saying but I find it strange that you say BI has motivation, while HL2 doesn't. In HL2, the world has been invaded by an evil alien race. Even right at the start, you can see the effect the invasion has on ordinary people and this gives a motivation to fight back. However, in BI, you are the evil invader. It is Booker that goes to a new city and starts tearing it apart and the only motivation he has to kill so many people is to clear a debt.

Secondly, you say that HL2 only really has good character interaction and not a story. However, in a first person game, character interaction is one of the main ways to tell a story, since you can only see from the perspective of the main character. In addition, BI also relies heavily on it. Without interaction with Elizabeth, there would be no story and no progression. She essentially is the story teller and in my opinion, is probably the only really good thing in the game.

 

[Dizeazedkiller]

I sort of don't get what the complaint is here. Hi, here's a story, why are you doing this stuff? Okay here, here is your motivation.

It wasn't the best story, and it wasn't particularly complicated, but it covered the main bases. Having a decent enough story with great characters with actual motivation and reasoning to do something.

I wasn't using the word "reasons" because there were actual reasons to do what Gordon did, I was using that the same way we'd use the word "Just 'cause"

Perhaps a better way of saying this is "Why do I have to kill Dr. Breen?" "I dunno, just because?" All that seems to happen is Gordon gets his suit back, then has to run from the combine who would, honestly, have a reason to chase him if he ran from a police interrogation. Instead of it seeming like "Hi, here's a story, here's your motivation" it seems more like "Hi, go here, okay here, now here, alright this guy wants you to kill Dr. Breen... You've been found, run! Alright now go here, and here, and here, oh you fell through here, go there to find a way out... What do you know? You're at the tower! Now blow it up!" It just seems like a series of totally unrelated events that eventually leads you to Breen's tower, where you fight to kill a man for no other reason then the fact that your friend Dr. Steiner told you to do it.

Been a while since my last play through so my idea of how the game plays out is fuzzy buuuut...

This is what the first segment of the game was all about. Going through the train station, seeing how they operate, seeing how this "Combine" has so much control and how they enforce it (with brutality) gave me a clear indication that they were a bunch of twats, to put it bluntly. Then Alex helps you, you meet up with Breen, sup kiddo we need your help but first lets get you somewhere safer. From that point, i can see your point of how you might lose focus, considering all the sidetracking. The main reason for you being there, i felt, was always to stop the combine eventually. For the most part that stays in the background, and different "arcs", i guess you could say, play out in the foreground (saving Alex's father, escaping the Combine at blackwater(?) through Ravenholm). Plus if memory serves the point of going to the tower wasn't specifically to kill Breen but to cause some damage at the core of operations.

tl;dr There is a lot of stuff to distract you from the main focus but it's there and, for me at least, it was pretty obvious and i need to go have another playthrough to make a better point but i have not the time.

 

[gunny1993]

HL:2 uses the gameplay to define the story better than Bioshock. For example the part in HL:2 where you are running from the combine with no weapons, it creates great atmosphere in a way that bioshock doesn't.

(not that i don't love the shit out of Bioshock)

 

[Chaos Isaac]

Really, as Booker and Elizabeth are both actually characters and care for what's going on, i'd have to say this is better.

Someone like Gordon Freeman has no more place or importance then say Roach or Frost in the Modern Warfare series. Quiet and replaceable with anyone else.

Gameplay wise, HL2 is probably a bit better then B:I, but characters and story take priority many a time for me, and this is such a case.

 

[zumbledum]

I went with HL 2 because its a great game with a good story well told. and BI is a poor story in an average game very well told.

 

[Vale]

Half Life 2 is an incredibly well crafted FPS. One of the best, to the point that it is a standard we compare other FPS to even though it's 8 years old. Great worldbuilding, interesting and likeable characters, a story that is on the surface dime-a-dozen (if enjoyable) but touches on much the same themes as the first Bioshock did with extremely efficient symbolism (especially in the environment)- it's unsubtle but as far as anvils go, it's a very good one. It also has very solid gunplay and gameplay even beyond that.
Also, gravity gun.
And Dog.

Infinite, imo, is definitely inferior from a gameplay perspective: gunplay is a bit dull and the weapons don't feel very good, the powers are cool but perhaps a bit perfunctory (like they were in Bioshock 1), the world design is amazing but has no substance and no life (the exact opposite of Half-Life 2), etc. Story's better in my opinion, even if I feel that it's central themes are... lacking in how they are executed (Half-Life always returns to railroads, Black Mesa and the fact that nobody in the entire game's universe ever really has valid alternatives to the choices they ultimately make, without ever stating the purpose of all this outright, Infinite kinda forgets about who and what it wants to make you care about, other than Elizabeth of course... which is fair enough, she is the most important thing in the game, but the fact that nothing else is relevant is kinda jarring). Songbird was basically not even a character, just a force of nature. Impressive, but not very interesting, not even with Elizabeth's emotional connection to him.
Still a pretty damn great FPS.

My vote goes to Half-Life 2, but that's just me, I guess.

 

[Kingjackl]

I'm probably going to have to give this one to Half Life 2, but let's stop acting as if it's the only great game of all time. 'Cult classic'? Seriously? If Half Life 2 is the only cult classic, what does that make (say) Earthbound?

 

[shadow_Fox81]

Bioshock infinite, it's just more complex. It's early days but i think infinite will age impeccably

Half life 2 is by contrast a bit of a chore to play through years on and is endearing more as a cultural phenomenon than a title that stands alone.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Bioshock Infinite may not be revolutionary but in order for a game to be revolutionary during these days, the revolution will have to appeal to the masses who just want to shoot things. So using the whole "BI wasn't revolutionary like HL2 was" isn't really fair because they are from different ages of gaming. Likewise, saying BI is better because of it's gameplay and graphics isn't really fair because it has way better technology. Judging both from their stories I think is really the only way to compare them and IMO, BI beats HL2 here by a longshot.

Anyway, sorry to necro this thread. I just beat BI and decided I'd go and search for people's thoughts on the ending and I ended up stumbling upon this thread.

 

[Guy from the 80's]

I did enjoy Infinite, but the standard fight-your-way-to-a-bad guy-that-speaks-via-your-radio-device-through-out-the-entire-game is getting old. I really wish Bioware would come up with something new. And Comstock? What a boring character.

Why not make a Bioshock game where there are no ultimate villain like Ryan-Comstock? Why not make a game where the plot is different.

 

[Extra-Ordinary]

This is going to end well...
My vote went to Bioshock.
Half-Life is great, no doubt about that, but personally, I couldn't get into it.
Bioshock Infinite on the other hand...