Buy This Game or Bioshock Infinite?

[Propheciah]

Title says it all, kind of deciding what to do with my money and I've narrowed it down to these. Any opinions? Looking for a good singe player experience with good gameplay, but most importantly an in-depth and immersive storyline.

[Martial.Lore]

Really tough choice. I have played through both twice. Tomb Raider took about 30% longer. But the gameplay of both is so much fun. Both are fairly linear. Both have decent stories. Bioshock vigors versus Lara's bow shots...hmmm. So difficult. You could almost toss a coin. I would recommend that you check the recommended specs for each and decide which one will run better on your rig. I think that Bioshock is the one that might encourage you more to challenge yourself with your gaming skills at higher difficulties upon replay. It also has more variety of options for dealing with enemies. So maybe Bioshock edges out Lara Croft, this time.

[Huge Jacked Man]

For me it would be Tomb Raider. Only because I like the climbing mechanics and the bow is really fun to use. I played throuh Infinite on console, and, while it was a fun game, I'd take Tomb Raider over it.

[Heisenberg]

I have the same problem. Hard to decide. I'm a fan of Lara Croft (played TR2 and TR3 many hours, other little less) but I've read many good opinions about Bioshock.

[Tusken GA]

I didn't really like Bioshock Infinite myself. The story thought far more of itself than its content justified, and the gameplay was pretty standard, repetitive shooter combat. Situations were either fighting-less looting or full scale firefights.

Tomb Raider regularly breaks up combat with platforming and puzzle solving, and the actual combat itself can often be completed with either stealth of machismo, in a variety of different ways, from ranged kills to close quarters, all without picking up a different weapon. There's a lot more variety to the game tha BI.

The four weapon system allows for some fairly interesting encounters, especially as you upgrade them to have additional functions. This is in contrast to Bioshock Infinite's significantly more limited two weapon limit and upgrade paths.

All in all, to me at least it's not even a contest. Tomb Raider wins. I've played it 5 times to Bioshock Infinite's 1 time.

[76561198056100416]

buy tomb raider. great game, no downsides

[CausticValkyrie]

For the most part, I'd say it's completely up to which style of gameplay you prefer. I love FPS but I've never found much replay value in the Bioshock games... I love them, but I've never been very tempted to go through them again. Tomb Raider on the other hand... Well, my Steam copy is the third one I've bought. I own the preorder version for PS3 and the collector's edition for 360, and I plan to buy the Definitive Edition for my PS4 as well. But I've always loved TR; I still own the originals for my still-working PS1 and break them out when I'm feeling nostalgic. I'd say go off your own experience; if the previous Bioshocks had a lot of replay value for you, go for those. Otherwise, it should be pretty obvious where my vote stands. XP

[Bob Obo]

Both games have the same flaws and strengths. Boring, grindy combat and an obsessive desire with railroading the player into watching the next intricately detailed set-piece. Good rewarding fun on the odd occasion the designers let go of your hand and dare allow you to actually play the game however.

Tomb Raider won for me - i actually finished it unlike Bioshock, because the combat in Bioshock felt like i was wading through mud, wearing concrete shoes, armed with a tooth pick.

[yusupov]

i hope u asked this on the BI board as well b/c yr obv going to get biased responses. i subscribe to forums of any game i own but a lot of ppl who follow or browse the game forums are fans, obviously.

bioshock infinite has arguably the most immersive storyline of all time...gameplay otoh is mediocre at its best, but tomb raiders isnt so great either. and the story...well, i havent finished it, just got it yesterday, but im not even paying it much attention, just doing random crap to get skill points & salvage. its basically a 3rd person FC3 w/ a chick & a different landscape. and far, FAR inferior gameplay. i would def go w/ bioshock infinitie based on yr criteria. iirc its only about a dozen hours on one, fairly thorough, playthru & its doubtful youll play it again. but its definitely an experience that sounds far more like what yr looking for than TR.

[yusupov]

Originally posted by Bob Obo:

Both games have the same flaws and strengths. Boring, grindy combat and an obsessive desire with railroading the player into watching the next intricately detailed set-piece. Good rewarding fun on the odd occasion the designers let go of your hand and dare allow you to actually play the game however.

Tomb Raider won for me - i actually finished it unlike Bioshock, because the combat in Bioshock felt like i was wading through mud, wearing concrete shoes, armed with a tooth pick.

lol @ yr analogy.

yes, its bad, but the story is just SO good i was absolutely swept away w/ it. fortunately i think thats the more typical response to the game. i think i beat it in a couple days which is REALLY rare for me. it will generally take me weeks to months of on-again off-again playing to beat even a few hours long campaign. infinite & spec ops are great examples where i finished in one sitting or close to, & the mechanics of both are not good. imo it goes to show what incredible storytelling can do & how important each extreme is. many games ive enjoyed far more & think are better have awful stories.

to the OP for a game thats a bit more balanced i would throw a curveball & HIGHLY recommend metro last light, GOTY for me & its gorgeous, good gameplay, & incredibly immersive by its atmosphere alone, though the story is imo, very touching & underrated.

[Tusken GA]

Originally posted by yusupov:

Originally posted by Bob Obo:

Both games have the same flaws and strengths. Boring, grindy combat and an obsessive desire with railroading the player into watching the next intricately detailed set-piece. Good rewarding fun on the odd occasion the designers let go of your hand and dare allow you to actually play the game however.

Tomb Raider won for me - i actually finished it unlike Bioshock, because the combat in Bioshock felt like i was wading through mud, wearing concrete shoes, armed with a tooth pick.

lol @ yr analogy.

yes, its bad, but the story is just SO good i was absolutely swept away w/ it. fortunately i think thats the more typical response to the game. i think i beat it in a couple days which is REALLY rare for me. it will generally take me weeks to months of on-again off-again playing to beat even a few hours long campaign. infinite & spec ops are great examples where i finished in one sitting or close to, & the mechanics of both are not good. imo it goes to show what incredible storytelling can do & how important each extreme is. many games ive enjoyed far more & think are better have awful stories.

to the OP for a game thats a bit more balanced i would throw a curveball & HIGHLY recommend metro last light, GOTY for me & its gorgeous, good gameplay, & incredibly immersive by its atmosphere alone, though the story is imo, very touching & underrated.

I don't really understand comments like this. By what metric are you saying Bioshock Infinite's story is good? Compared to RPGs like The Witcher 2, Bioshock Infinite's story is hamfisted and frankly insulting in its stereotypes. Compared to games like Mass Effect 1 and 2, Bioshock's use of science as a plot device is almost juvenile.

And compared to movies, TV shows, and books out there, things like Schindler's List, Firefly, and The Kingkiller Chronicles, it's frankly pathetic.

I mean, do we judge a game's story telling solely on its direct competition, ie CoD? If so, I'm sorry, that's not how you judge the quality of a thing.

/END RANT

[yusupov]

i dont think it was complex (well, not in any truly deep sense) but it was so good that it COMPLETELY carried the game for me & many, many many other people & jaded critics. i think good storytelling, certainly in videogames, is about a lot more than complexity, which is what your game examples bring to mind. but its difficult for me to explain atm as i just woke up.

anyway, yeah bioshock infinite has a 'complicated' plot, but its a plot that urges you forward & i was definitely happy to go along for the ride. is it as good a game as the ones you mentioned? no, not close. as good a story, from some kind of capital c Critical standpoint? no. but as gripping? i would say its more so, as gripping a story as ive yet played. for me that counts as immersion; i find myself easily suckered into plotdriven works while also typically not giving a damn about plot in general. i suppose if you examine bioshock w/ a more critical eye it wont hold up as well. playing it at its release, when it was one of the true & few gaming Events ive witnessed, it was very easy to be giddily swept along; i cant imagine thats changed at all for anyone willing to let go a bit.

overrated? yes. great game? yes. Great Game? no. bettter overall experience than tomb raider? definitely.

[Tusken GA]

At the risk of derailing the thread further, complexity is not at issue. When I compare Iorveth and Roche from Witcher 2 to Comstock and Fitzroy of Bioshock Infiinite, the latter is simply juvenile. Relying on trite stereotypes and poor characterization, Bioshock Infinite simply cannot even place itself in the same stellar plane as The Witcher 2.

And when I compare Mass Effect's thoroughly researched and painstakingly realized fictional science to Bioshock Infinite's misuse and distortion of a realworld scientific principle, something that should have been, if you'll pardon the pun, infinitely easier to use as a plot device, it simply fails to make any meaningful impact, ESPECIALLY when you consider that that science served as the entire driver of the game's central twist.

A story does not need to be complex to be good. Subtlety and nuance are not necessarily complex concepts, and yet every good story ever written makes use of them extensively.

Characters need realistic motivations, dialog needs to intermingle with the events of the plot and the dialog of the other characters, and their actions need to be based on who they are as fictional people.

Bioshock didn't have any of that. Overt and unsubtle critiques on the nature of baptism and religion, character dialog that contradicts it self in and out of gameplay, characters that are motivated by single note traits like Revenge and Greed, and a plot that defies the very physical principles it pretends to understand.

It's not good. Almost every piece of it boils down to that.

[Yang]

This game,is better !

[Razor]

well depends on what you like tomb raiders is more adventure and bioshock is straight action + bioshock 1 and 2 where way better cuzz they still had thit scary feeling and seroundings so for me i would buy tomb raider which i already did :D

[Rekopek]

I would go for tomb raider, i loved that game so much