Poll: Half-Life 2 vs. Bioshock Infinite

[Alexander Kirby]

So I ran out of excuses not to buy Bioshock Infinite a few of weeks ago. Playing it the first thing I realised was how, in many ways, its way of telling a story is quite similar to Half-Life 2's. Now obviously these games have quite a few differences when it comes down to gameplay, but if we can just ignore that for a second and think purely about the story and how it's told, which would you say you prefer? I honestly can't decide...

Will you go for the closest thing this industry has to a cult classic or is your money on what the fresh meat can offer?

[small]...note to self: think of better metaphors[/small]

Despite my addition of a poll I'll be more interested in the reasons why you chose. Also, I think I'll limit it to just the original Half-Life 2 for now because if I allow the episodes then I may as well allow the first Half-Life and then I'd have to allow the other Bioshocks and it'd all get a bit complicated *sigh*.

 

[DishonoredElderSouls]

I've only played the first couple of levels of Half-Life 2, but I still know that it's better than Infinite. Infinite had extremely disappointing level design, largely because it never embraced the massive levels and scale of skyline battles that it displayed in its gameplay trailers.

Infinite's core story is very solid, but it's completely missing the world development that the first game had. Mainly, the awesome audio logs spread throughout the world given by various little citizens of the world, as opposed to the audio logs in Infinite that were made by all of like four people.

Not to mention that the Vigors in Infinite had little tactical meaning, Crows would stun people and then move to another, Bucking Bronco would stun people and throw them into the air, Shock Jockey would stun people and amplify damage, and then you had Possession, Devil's Kiss, and a couple of other lame ones...there's simply nothing present in the game quite like the Splicers-Daddies-Security ecology that made Rapture such an incredible place.

So in my opinion, the debate shouldn't be between Half-Life 2 and Infinite, but Half-Life 2 and BioShock 1.

Edit: Even though yeah, you said that it should just be Infinite and none of the other BS games.

 

[sethisjimmy]

Half Life 2? A cult classic? It's one of the best selling PC games of all time and has won countless awards and critical acclaim...

Anyway, I went with HL2. It was one of the first games to ever get me interested in level design and the relationship between the game design and the player. I also really like it's subtle way of giving hints about the setting and story, often in wordless exploration and interaction. I particularly like the moments of solitude dedicated to puzzle solving and exploration. These times really lend themselves to a desolate, lonesome atmosphere.

That said, looking back, I can see that the game can be pretty formulaic, and often reuses puzzle ideas and fights in the episodes. The action can be kind of dull at times too, especially the few times you're simply shooting at people with no other gameplay gimmick like the gravity gun or setting up turrets.

Bioshock Infinite is definitely a good game, but I think it is and was way overhyped. I wouldn't call it a good example of games as art as some have. Mainly because while the story is good and interesting, the gameplay is pretty derivative a lot of the time. A while ago in a post I wrote about the Patented Bioshock series Method of Storytelling (tm) that involves short moments of actual story progression divided by long arbitrarily contrived (often to the point of being insulting) fetch quests that are sometimes layers deep and often involve recently introduced secondary antagonist NPCs that talk to you through PA systems have a nasty tendency to send conveniently packaged waves of enemies your way for giggles every now and then.

It seems a bit hypocritical to criticize a game that was so obviously heavily influenced by a game I praise, but I guess that's just me lashing out at the major hype the Infinite gets. Plenty of games have taken notes from HL2's book over the past almost decade now, and I'm often critical because I think a lot of them miss what makes that particular method of storytelling and gameplay mesh so well.

But it all comes down to opinion. I don't like hearing other people make blanket criticisms of modern gaming while viewing the past through thick nostalgia goggles, so I'm not going to claim HL2 is a bastion of great storytelling and gameplay, but I do prefer it to Infinite personally. I do enjoy these types of debates on storytelling though.

 

[5ilver]

No offense but this comparison is just a l-i-i-i-i-i-ttle insulting. Bioshock Infinite is a fun little casual title you go through in a weekend and then forget about it.

Half Life 2 changed so many things about gaming forever- shooters in general, characters, story telling, gameplay... I'm not even going to mention the mods. But seriously, some of HL2's mods are better than current age AAA titles and they're FREE.

If you don't get what I'm saying, just find another shooter from HL2's era (it was released in 2004, so 9 years ago) and you'll (hopefully) get my point.


As far as the story- eh, neither game has a great story but the sad part is Bioshock Infinite relies a lot on its story to carry it whereas HL2 has a ton of other stuff going for it. Yeah, there's the character of Elizabeth and the cartoony visuals as well but eeeeh...

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I never understood the seemingly unlimited love for Half-Life 2. It was great at the time of it's release, sure. But I can't force myself to play it again. I only had the energy to play it once. It's filled with extremely boring driving sections and very bad first person platforming. And I don't really care about the story either. To be honest, I was a fan of Half-Life 1 multiplayer. I was never a fan of the single player aspect of the series. I think the internet just accepted that Half-Life 2 should be universally praised as a flawless game and people are afraid to say anything bad about it because they fear that they won't be taken seriously. Well, since I don't give a shit I'll just say what I mean. I had more fun playing Bioshock games than I ever did playing any of the Half-Life games. And I care about the story in Bioshock Infinite a lot more than I ever even attempted to care about anything that went on in Half-Life 2.

As a matter of fact, HL2 probably wouldn't even make it on my Top 100 list. I'm not even joking. I think it's THAT boring.

 

[Alexander Kirby]

No offense but this comparison is just a li-i-i-i-itle insulting. Bioshock Infinite is a fun little casual title you go through in a weekend and then forget about it.

Half Life 2 changed so many things about gaming forever- shooters in general, characters, story telling, gameplay...

If you don't get what I'm saying, just find another shooter from HL2's era (it was released in 2004, so 9 years ago) and you'll (hopefully) get my point.


As far as the story- eh, neither game has a great story but the sad part is Bioshock Infinite relies a lot on its story to carry it whereas HL2 has a ton of other stuff going for it.

Half-Life 2 was revolutionary. But I think we've already established that. I'm simply asking which you prefer right now, which style of story telling you would like to see future games take on most. I already knew HL2 would 'win' because how it effected all of us back when we first played it, but I'm trying to look past that at which I actually prefer in the present. HL2 has held the crown for years and I'm asking you if you think it's been topped. While the answer for most will be no I think the question is still worth asking, after all, shouldn't we always be aiming to better ourselves?

 

[aguspal]

Half life 2 is one of the most overrated games that I have played so far.

I liked Bioshock Infinite. Overrated on its own a bit as well, but its still TONS better than HL2.

 

[5ilver]

Half-Life 2 was revolutionary. But I think we've already established that. I'm simply asking which you prefer right now, which style of story telling you would like to see future games take on most. I already knew HL2 would 'win' because how it effected all of us back when we first played it, but I'm trying to look past that at which I actually prefer in the present. HL2 has held the crown for years and I'm asking you if you think it's been topped. While the answer for most will be no I think the question is still worth asking, after all, shouldn't we always be aiming to better ourselves?

If we were to pretend both games had come out this year and neither has any mods yet, etc, etc:

I like neither. Both types of story telling feel like I'm a tourist being hand-held through a theme park. I know the combine is bad because... everyone keeps repeating it (and I'm getting shot I guess?). I know Comstock is bad because... the game keeps implying it heavy-handedly and maybe because he keeps sending guys to kill me.
I'm not taking part in either story as a character (but rather as a viewer) so it's very difficult for me to feel invested.

If I had to choose, I would go with HL2 because at least Gordon's reactions felt closer to mine.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I would argue that in most cases when people voice negative opinions about HL2 it is not very well thought out. The Half Life series had lots of thought put into it and both big installments (original and the Half Life 2) influenced gaming in a bigger picture.

I don't deny the influence it had on other games. But in itself it's not a very fun game for me. There's not a single moment in that game that I want to relieve again. When I was done with it I never attempted to give it another go. No reason. No replay value. It's about the experience for me. And Half-Life 2 was a somewhat empty experience. Bioshock Infinite on the other hand is filled with amazing moments that I want to experience over and over again. I feel like I gain something when I play it.

 

[alphamalet]

Will you go for the closest thing this industry has to a cult classic or is your money on what the fresh meat can offer?

Half-Life 2 a cult classic? Excuse me while I laugh my ass off.

On a serious note, probably Bioshock Infinite. I never got the HL2 fandom honestly. The game is good but it's not amazing.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Wow 2 shooters I have actually played and finished both of them had great moments but ultimately didnt live up to my expectations which werent that high to be fair.

Bioshock Infinite has a much better story and characters while Half Life 2 has better gameplay well in parts it does anyway other parts its incredibly dull. The gravity gun saved it for me but mechanically Half Life 2s gameplay is better.

As you can probably tell though I am not a huge fan of Half Life 2 and I still think Bioshock Infinite was worse than Bioshock but as for HL2 and BI I would choose Bioshock Infinite as superior overall it just felt like it delivered a better overall experience.

 

[King Billi]

I'm going to say Bioshock Infinite purely for the reason that I instantly wanted to replay it as soon as I reached the end(the same goes for Bioshock 1 and 2 as well) whereas I have yet to even finish Half-Life 2 at this point in time despite quite a few attempts. Not because I feel that it's particularly bad in any way, in fact my first few minutes playing it were spent mostly admiring the scenery. The gameplay is very good and what little I've seen of the "story" thus far is certainly interesting enough to hold my interest but I don't know... Playing it just... wears me down.
I can't stay invested in the whole thing as the game just seems to go on forever with very little to break it up. I just can't keep track of whats supposed to be happening when I'm just constantly moving from one set piece to another without any meaningful interactions or feedback.

 

[Silvanus]

Both incredible games, but HL2 takes my vote. It was an experience that stuck with me for longer.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Infinite had better story and gameplay for me. I'd go with that one.

 

[Lilani]

Half-Life 2 was revolutionary. But I think we've already established that. I'm simply asking which you prefer right now, which style of story telling you would like to see future games take on most. I already knew HL2 would 'win' because how it effected all of us back when we first played it, but I'm trying to look past that at which I actually prefer in the present. HL2 has held the crown for years and I'm asking you if you think it's been topped. While the answer for most will be no I think the question is still worth asking, after all, shouldn't we always be aiming to better ourselves?

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that they are so similar. I mean yes, they are first-person shooters and involve the bending of space/time in some form or another, but at this point that's about it. Booker DeWitt isn't a silent protagonist, which completely changes how the player relates to him and the game. Gordon Freeman is simply a vessel the player exists in. It's up to the player how they regard the world and the events going on. But with Booker's commentary, you know exactly how your player-character is intended to interact with the environment, and you know his exact relationship with the world and other characters. In Bioshock Infinite you can make choices, but HL2 is completely linear. Infinite had huge statements to make about choice and morals, and all sorts of different meta-narratives like Bioshock 1 had. HL2 doesn't have a lot of hidden messages--it's just the story of Gordon Freeman and the Black Mesa incident.

I guess you could say the sidekick is similar too (Alyx and Elizabeth) but lots of games have sidekicks that help you do things you couldn't have done on their own. If you're going to say that makes the two similar then the Spyro games must be similar as well because he has Sparx as a sidekick, or the Sonic games because of Tails. Impervious sidekicks aren't anything new.

But as stated in the second post in this thread, a much more fair comparison would be between Bioshock 1 and HL2. Both are highly influential, from about the same genearion of games, and much more similar in the way they are constructed.

 

[skywolfblue]

I'll have to go with Bioshock Infinite.

As much as I love HL2's story for it's "Dystopian world with a totalitarian evil government run by space aliens" setting... That's it's only real strength.

- Infinite's story is told much better, there are audio diaries everywhere, instead of having to guess, you can hear it from the characters themselves, and their voice and emotion really do add to why they're doing what they're doing. Half Life 2 has very very little actual dialogue. As much as I love HL2's story, it's also a bit simplistic "Hero (who everyone mysteriously loves even though they've never seen him before) saves humanity from aliens". Infinite and the Bioshock series on the other hand have plots that critically examine political philosophies, and point out that pretty much any philosophy taken to an extreme can be dangerous.

- A talking protagonist. Booker talks to Elizabeth, pushes people in the crowd aside, gets his hand stabbed. He's a very real character. Gordon Freeman on the other hand stands there silently doing nothing while Alyx Vance gushes about how much she loves him...

- Better supporting character. Alyx was amazing for the time. But it's been several years now and the technology has improved quite a bit. Elizabeth does so much more, she dances, she talks to shopkeepers, she's much more fluid and expressive.

- On gameplay they're about the same. Bioshock Infinite's gameplay wasn't nearly as good as Bioshock 2. Both Infinite and HL2 have pretty standard guns, HL2 has the Gravity Gun as it's "Unique" thing, and Infinite has Vigors.

 

[Zhukov]

*shrug*

HL2 was obviously the more groundbreaking of the two in terms of game design. BI was way more imaginative though. I guess I enjoyed BI more, but that's largely because it benefitted from nearly an extra decade of advances in game tech and design.

So... no real preference. It's a bit of a weird comparison really.

 

[ThreeName]

Infinite's gameplay was more enjoyably varied (keyword: enjoyably), the story was much better (i.e. actually there), I actually cared about the characters and I'd probably play it more than once.

I've played the first two levels of HL2 many times, and wondered how I got through it in the first place. Yes it was important for the industry and all that, but it just isn't very fun.