Bioshock Infinite vs The Last of Us -if you’ve finished both

As an addendum to the above - why?

Why I prefer The Last of Us to Bioshock;

• After thinking about it, I feel the story of TLoU was more consistently delivered and cohesive. It was simpler, sure, but it is also better more subtly told and doesn't depend upon an admittedly awesome last-minute twist.
• Naughty Dog somehow made a game which I didn't enjoy playing, but still felt compelled to play. The basic mechanics complement eachother well and fit seamlessly within the context of the world. However, the oppressiveness of the environment lead to me dreading the next big fight and fleeing from the game when, for example, I needed to go through a tunnel. (seriously, fuck tunnels). Bioshock was more fun by a large league, but TLoU made me question whether "fun" is really necessary in games. Maybe "compelling" is just as valid?
• Ambiguity is much appreciated in both experiences, but I feel it is more genuine in The Last of Us, not caused by a quirky application of physics.
• Finally, I think the characters are simply more complex in TLoU, which I enjoy.

All of these statements, by way of being my personal opinion, are of course both subjective and arguable.

It may be because I'm coming off the high of having just played The Last of Us, but I have to go with that for the time being. Around GOTY time when I'm making my personal list, I'll probably play through each again, back to back, to formulate a less clouded opinion.

@ll_exile_ll: Haha, but wouldn't it be effected by order once again? :)

That aside, like my favourite movie of all time, Requiem for a Dream, I don't think I could make myself play The Last of Us again. I can't really watch The Road again either.

Like Requiem, this isn't a comment upon the compelling-ness of any of those experiences, but rather they are so... raw that I can't force myself through that again, especially since "you only experience something for the first time once".

Instead, I tend to write notes after I finish these games - or talk about them on my podcast - so I can go back and listen to / read my thoughts around GOTY time.

I really can't decided, but gun to my head I would say The Last of Us.

They are both pretty average ?

@ares42 said:

That would fit under "I can't decide!!" or a vote for one/the other (going to the one which is less average in your opinion) :)

BioShock Infinite: 8.5

The Last of Us: 10

@cale said:

Wow - that's a big disparity. I'm more along the lines of... Bioshock: 9.5, The Last of Us: 9.8-10 (they are both 5 stars).

What did you especially like / dislike with them?

It's really tough to decide because they both do so much right, especially with regard to their characters and world building.

I'd probably say The Last of Us. It feels a bit more tonally consistent than Bioshock (i.e. the looting in Last of Us feels like it belongs and there isn't a scene where I'm suddenly fighting an annoying ghost for like no reason), and I think that while Troy Baker's Booker DeWitt was a well written and voice acted character, it really pales in comparison to the complexity and delivery of Troy Baker's Joel.

I enjoyed BioShock: Infinite more than the Last of Us. I think BioShock's world was more fun to explore and the combat was more varied. There are 3 or 4 parts of the Last of Us where I just wanted the game to let me move forward but I had to finish, like the swimming parts. Being killed in one hit but a Clicker could get frustrating, too.

I love both games, though.

@selfconfessedcynic: I didn't particularly enjoy the combat in Infinite. The constant looting became a chore and kept bringing me out of the atmosphere the game was trying to create. I didn't feel much of an attachment to Elizabeth, though I really enjoyed the world and how the story unfolded. As for The Last of Us, it's now my favorite game of all time. I have been playing games since the NES days, I've had games that shaped my youth and my teens, yet none of them even come close to this one for me. I have no problems with saying it's the best game ever made. I had so many 'first' moments with it, experiences that I've never had in any other medium, let alone games. It was something special for me.

Reading @ll_Exile_ll's post I feel I should point out, I almost NEVER play games through twice. I can probably count on one hand how many games I've finished more than once in my lifetime. Yet I'm already mid-way through my second playthrough of The Last of Us on Survivor difficulty, planning on playing it on Survivor NG+ after that. I've never done this with any other game.

@selfconfessedcynic:

It's not so much order as it is time. Infinite was months ago, I just played The Last of Us. I am still in the post ending phase of spending a lot of time thinking about the game, just like I was for the week or so after finishing Infinite.

After spending a significant amount of time away from both games, I'll be able to come back and look at them with a more critical eye and really stack them up against each other.

I can understand not wanting to experience something again, but that's definitely not how I like to enjoy media. If I like something, I love experiencing it multiple times. I play all may favorite games multiple times and I watch entire TV series or movies multiple times if I really like them. I've played Ocarina of Time completely through nearly 15 times, played each Mass Effect game 5+ times, played Chrono Trigger 3 times, and watched countless TV series 2,3, or even 4 times all the way through. I know some people probably find that weird or to be a waste of time, but I love experiencing things I like more than once.

@chaser324 said:

I wonder how much of that has to do with Troy and how much lies with the writing / directing of both games. Thinking back, I'm just as impressed both of his performances. I think he's even better at this than Nolan North is, and he's retaining his mantle as my favourite voice actor in games although Nolan's David was a fantastic character in The Last of Us.

I think Naughty Dog has the advantage of it being a 3rd person game - you get to see Joel looking at his watch, or smiling when the kids start yapping or just... looking at giraffes. Perhaps that's also why I think the characters are just more... real in The Last of Us.

That is really cool to hear - I think TLoU pushed the medium forward especially in terms of story telling, and your stance on it helps me crystallise that feeling.

@ll_exile_ll:

Fair enough. I totally have double standards for some things. Eg. I've played Persona 4 Golden (my favourite game of all time) through like 6 times, and yet The Last of Us (which is now number 7 on my top 10 list I think) I'll probably never touch again.

That said - I wonder how much replayability will factor into your final thoughts. Bioshock is, to me, the more fun game - and I wouldn't mind going back to it another time (especially if there's a fan-patch to enable something along the lines of a New Game +)

@selfconfessedcynic: Yeah, there's nothing really wrong with Baker's delivery of Booker. I think I just preferred his delivery of Joel because of the way he went back to his Texas roots with it. I'm from the south, and even though I don't really have much of an accent, I still find it a bit insulting that you rarely see strong smart characters with that sort of twang in their voice (Raylan Givens is one of the few other recent examples that comes to mind). Southern accent seems to all too often be used as short hand for, "hey, this character is dumb/racist/religious/homophobic."

As far as the writing, I don't think there's any question that Joel certainly has the edge, and I think that you're probably right about having him in front of the camera allowing the character to feel more real.

@chaser324: Man, you just reminded me of Boston Legal. It always felt weird that the basis for one of the characters was essentially "wow, this Texan is surprisingly not stupid". (I still loved that show though :D)

Also, I had no idea Troy was from Texas. The more you know, huh?

Both were special, but I am still thinking about The Last of Us three weeks after game completion (had a promo copy) and Bioshock really didn't leave a comparable ongoing impression.

OP should have mentioned if spoilers were permitted. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that they are since the title says "if you've finished both."

I think it's pretty astounding that both games managed to tell emotionally complex stories about dads. Both games feature Loss heavily as a theme, and both games rely on their protagonists being anti-heroes. I suppose the real question is which game had the more satisfying arc. In that case I'd have to go with Booker DeWitt over Joel. Booker comes to an understanding and acceptance of his villainy. Joel rationalizes his evil deeds as "survival" as if it's a hand wave that everyone should understand. While Booker spent his life running from his past, Joel spends The Last of Us running toward his. I suppose which you find better depends entirely on your comprehension of the themes present in the game, and which arc you identify with more.

For my money, I'd say Bioshock. Not because I disliked The Last of Us, but because Booker's acceptance of himself provided a satisfying, optimistic close to a heart-wrenching, personal story. Joel on the other hand never comes to terms with the evil he's done. He continues to rationalize and excuse his behaviour and his misdeeds. Even going so far as to damn humanity just so he can keep his surrogate daughter from dying on him. While I fully believe that Joel isn't an evil man, he is a selfish one, and he has learned absolutely learned nothing by the end of the game.

The Last of Us is an important game.

Bioshock Infinite is just a great one.

Also, best year for games ever? It might even dethrown 98

@naru_joe93 said:

Could you clarify what you think the distinction is? I think they're both landmark titles as far as showing the maturing and progression of the video game medium.

I think a game where Ellie and Elizabeth make their way through a fungal zombie infected Columbia would be fun!

Seriously everyone should play both.

@chaser324: The Last of Us proves games don't have to be "fun" to be worth playing (as @selfconfessedcynic said). This used to be reserved for more "respected" mediums (movies, tv, books), but tlou has broken this boundary to smithereens.

What other game can claim to be as meaningful, have great mechanics, and still be emotionally (and sometimes physically) exausting to get through? And it has some of the best characters/acting yet found in a game

Bioshock suceedes on 2 of these levels; being meaningful (though, the last of us has much more important things to say) and having good characters/acting. The actually playing part feels so completely far removed from the story/characters that it frustrates me to no end.

Thats not to say it shouldn't be what it is (a linear fps) or that I know what it should be. All I know is the last of us captured me on that level, and infinite did not

Also, I was disappointed with infinite once I realized how far removed it was from some of the initial gameplay demos. It's a completely dumbed down version of what was initially shown, which furthur disappoints me.

@naru_joe93 said:

Bioshock Infinite was an amazing experience, as was The Last of Us. I've debated with myself since I finished TLOU whether or not it or BI was my game of the year thus far. They're both fantastic games in their own right and have extremely well realized worlds full of rich cohesive atmosphere. I would say I "enjoyed" my time with Infinite more, but with full understanding that TLOU is not a game meant to be enjoyed. I felt stressed, depressed, and emotionally drained throughout my playthrough of TLOU, but that was exactly what it was meant to be. Bioshock Infinite left me with wonder, satisfaction and curiosity. It succesfully created a meaningful conversation and analyzation in the community the likes of which I haven't seen in awhile.

Simply put, bioshock Infinite's world left me in awe and The Last of Us's world left me with sorrow. These two games excelled in creating rich tone, meaningful characters, and an interesting narrative. Unfortunately, there's the need to decide which is the better game and to that I say no. I will not force myself to decide this year which I thought was "better". I will hold the steadfast opinion that both are fantastic in their own right and leave it be.

@oldirtybearon: while it has a great message/story, it is hindered by poor design choices. It also back hands any message against violence in games by containing loads of meaningless violence. I mean, the game starts out with a chopper vs chopper set piece.

Very well put, these are my thoughts exactly. Despite being called a Video "Game", The Last of Us made no reservations of being fun. Rather it told a decidedly grim story and did it well. It broke away from the perceptions that a Game is only mindless fun, that's not worth respectable or responsible people's time.

@naru_joe93 said:

Spec Ops: The Line isn't against violence, or even meaningless violence. The game deconstructs the purpose of that violence and then applies it to a realistic scenario. It asks the question "what kind of person does this?" and then builds a narrative from there. It also helped that they used the backbone of Heart of Darkness as a jumping off point. The idea that the game was hampered by poor design choices doesn't hold water when the relentless shootbang of the whole affair is the point. It provides the exact same violence and repetitive gameplay found in every other shooter (including The Last of Us and Call of Duty), but changes the context of it to something heinous. By warping the perspective - or better yet pulling back the curtain - on the violence and your (the player) thrill of wanton death and destruction it raises interesting questions about player motivation and its relevance to character motivation. It is the most under appreciated and sophisticated undertaking when it comes to meta commentary on not just the nature of violent games, but our relationship as players to those violent games. Everything about Spec Ops, from the story to the characters to yes, the way it plays, is there for a reason. You said no other game has made it physically and mentally exhausting to play. That no game before has proven that gameplay can be un-fun and still remain satisfying or worthwhile. I countered with the first game to do it.

Spec Ops: The Line also succeeds in being a game that is physically and mentally exhausting to play. Playing through in one ten hour sitting, by the end of the game I was mentally haggard. I was frayed. I was like a raw nerve exposed so when it came time to choose my ending (of which there are like, a dozen, something The Last of Us could have benefited from), I was just as shell-shocked and dumbfounded as Captain Walker was putting down his rifle and being whisked away by the second recon team. That's something I didn't get with The Last of Us, by the way - a satisfying conclusion. The conclusion that is there is a non-ending that doesn't make sense and actively undoes the character development Joel undergoes throughout the game.

Joel's whole arc is supposed to be him rediscovering his humanity. Ellie constantly reinforces the better side of his nature, and in time he embraces it and learns how to live again, not just survive. All of that work is undone in one cutscene where Joel decides that his happiness is worth more than the lives of the human race. Not only is it a betrayal of his character but it doesn't even make a lot of sense. He spent a year with this girl, and in that time he rediscovered his morality and his humanity. For him to suddenly piss it all away because he can't bear to see his daughter die twice shows how Naughty Dog was willing to betray their characters in a cheap attempt to "say something." If they wanted The Last of Us to remain true to its characters, they should have explored multiple endings that took the player's actions in the OR into account.

I like The Last of Us, I really do, but I don't think it holds a candle to Spec Ops. Spec Ops asks the player to ponder violence, their role in and reverie of violence, and if it means anything at all. Spec Ops also leaves the ending open (by having multiple endings to cover every possible angle of the situation) for the player to determine the ultimate truth of the narrative. The Last of Us should have had that, and it didn't. Naughty Dog wanted to tell a story about Loss and what humanity is worth even as we die as a species. Instead of ultimately delivering control to the player, they opt to choose for you and say "nah it ain't worth shit everything was for nothing lulz later."

I'm sounding a lot harsher on The Last of Us than I mean to. I really did enjoy it, I just have fundamental issues with the way the story concludes.

I've finished both and I preferred The Last of Us for so many reasons, but regarding the narrative I felt that Infinite's writing was more clever while TLoU's writing was way better.

@oldirtybearon: You're making spec ops sound fancier than it really is. While it definitely attempted some if the thing's you're talking about, it amounted to nothing more than a cheap guilt trip.

And Id comment on the last of us ending, but I cant do spoiler text on my phone. I also really don't feel like it anymore

Also you're trying to rationalize it being designed poorly? If it's trying to break down games like cod or uncharted, shouldnt it at least play as well as them? I certainly believe so.

For a while I legitimately thought about voting "I can't decide," but I convinced myself in my better judgment that would've been a cop-out and thus continued to rack my brains, fresh off my experience from The Last of Us and not too many months removed from BioShock Infinite. Therefore I voted The Last of Us.

I definitely agree with the criticism brought up earlier in this thread that The Last of Us has a far more consistent tone. I'd also say its pacing was superior to BioShock Infinite. Everything, including the quiet moments and intense arc climaxes were exceptionally executed in The Last of Us.

As much as I loved the final arc for BioShock Infinite, all of The Last of Us was an amazing experience for me all around, between Joel and Ellie's development throughout all the ordeals they've gone through and actually personally playing through those ordeals -- struggling to survive firefights and very fearfully stealthing our way out of danger. Even as frustrated as I got at certain points of The Last of Us in Hard mode I felt like it was a more satisfying kind of frustrating than playing BioShock Infinite in its Hard difficulty.

What particularly won me over was how effective The Last of Us was at making me feel so ambivalent about a protagonist. I wanted to get behind Joel for the entire game (his understandable reluctance at several points made it incredibly difficult, though) and in spite my ultimate, fundamental disagreement as to his final decision, I actually couldn't hate him for doing what he did.

I am actually grateful they denied player agency over the game's final moments since it solidifies Joel's antihero character development, which they definitely dropped several of hints about all throughout the story. Even the ambiguity regarding the very last scene with Ellie (her face exudes a bit of doubt in spite of her verbal complacency), I just love The Last of Us for how it stayed true to the human condition without pulling any punches to the very end.

Seeing Spec Ops mentioned in this thread is really reminding me how badly I've been meaning to play it, though!

I very much enjoyed both games. Though I my opinion, I think the Last of Us wins ever so slightly. I feel Infinite is a little bit shallow compared to the original Bioshock's mechanics and while I liked Infinite's ending more, I never felt as if the Last of Us was trying to pad out it's story whereas Infinite has a few sections there were just a little bit too long.

I'm liking this trend of games that focus on the relationship between a small cast of characters. Telltale's The Walking Dead, Bioshock Infinite and now The Last of Us have proven how effective it can be. I wonder if GTA V will also use it's 3-character dynamic effectively. Here's hoping.

@oldirtybearon: Mechanics aren't great in Spec Ops; they're solid but mostly generic; it pretty much boils down to point gun and shoot dudes. To be fair so does Bioshock Infinite. Spec Ops is a really good third person shooter but it doesn't have anything particularly impressive about the gameplay to distance itself in that regard like Vanquish does for instance.

Wow, I am really surprise the Last of Us is winning so lopsidedly. I love both. Any other year Bioshock would have gotten game of the year for sure. Naughty Dog are really resonating with a lot of people lately.

What we need is a "super team" of Irrational and Naughty Dog to make a super game that is neither Last of Us or Bioshock.

The magic in Spec-Ops is the deconstruction of the FPS through the story in turn shows up in mechanics. It is a very poor FPS but that is the point.

I HATED the ending to Bioshock Infinite. It felt lazy, rushed and stupid. I absolutely hate when 80% of a game can be cut out without effecting the story at all and when the last 15 minutes of a game are "big reveal, 5 minutes of dialogue explaining that reveal, then ANOTHER big reveal! then 10 more minutes of explaining that reveal"

I can't make a qualitative contrast between the two as I've only play Bioshock Infinite. Said so, I have no intentions to play The Last of Us, the premise is so Vanilla... OMG zoombies + everything goes to shit + human nature is evil + Anti-hero w/ little girl... Its just no no no, please stop! Can't take more of that.

Awesome responses! I had to go to sleep, but I'm glad I kept this page open.

I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed a number of them, especially @equitasinvictus, @oldirtybearon (I haven't played spec ops, but it's a very interesting comparison), @naru_joe93 (your 3 level analogy is pretty cool, and I agree to a large extent), @themanwithnoplan (it's perfectly OK to refrain from deciding! luckily we aren't paid to do so for GOTY :D).

I thought the same when I first saw the announcement videos - but now I just think you're denying yourself something very special. Your prerogative though.

tough choice, I enjoyed the story of last of us more, however I preferred the game play and combat of Bioshock infinite . No doubt they where both great games.

I choose The last of us, simply because the gameplay is fun, the pacing is better and the characters are more fleshed out. I actually don't see Bioshock anywhere near to what Last of Us greatness is, I feel the game is a bench mark in consoles and it's certainly cemented it self next to the best this gen( Mass Effect 2, Fallout3, Uncharted2, etc.)

With Bioshock Infinite I couldn't wait to get back to playing it. I've never felt that way about Last of Us. Hell, it's not even my first or second choice when I have some free time.

A lot of people here are saying that The Last of Us isn't "fun" in the traditional sense, but I'd argue that the satisfaction of sneaking up on a creeper with a shiv or successfully throwing a molotov cocktail falls under the category of fun. Sure, it's emotionally draining from a narrative standpoint, but I still actively enjoyed what I was playing. I do understand the other viewpoint though, just surprised so many people feel that way.

That being said, I'd have to give the edge to BioShock Infinite. I think the world in that game - Columbia - goes a long way in establishing its distinction as a more original product. I'm not necessarily equating familiarity to lesser quality, especially since The Last of Us handles the whole infected apocalypse storyline with a brilliant level of restraint and confidence, but more often than not I tend to lean more towards things that are a bit more inventive. Kind of a dumb analogy, but it's the same reason that I tend to like films with original screenplays more so than adapted works.

Also, I thought I'd point out that I felt Winter was one of the weaker segments in The Last of Us, which seems to put me in the minority. It presented an interesting narrative shift, but I didn't like playing that part as much.

Last of Us for me. Multiplayer makes the difference. And the world and character building in singleplayer is so much better.

I do prefer FPS over TPS however. Regardless - I like the Last of Us better overall, and I'll be playing a lot more of it than I did Bioshock Infinite, because of its awesome multiplayer.

@amlabella said:

I'd say that I totally agree that there are fun aspects to TLoU's gameplay without a doubt - sneaking past an entire encounter is also incredibly satisfying (such as the tunnel at the end just before the hospital) - however, there were a number of times where I just had to put the game down and walk away. I couldn't play anymore even though I like the combat - it was just too intense, or some areas were just too foreboding.

At first I chalked it up to bad pacing (can't you give me more time to breath!?), but then I'd look at a clock and realise I had just been walking around for 20-40 mins with no combat whatsoever. It's got a lot to do with the fight for survival, and Naughty Dog successfully putting me in the position of "I just want to stop fighting, but I need to fight to complete this journey."

Anyway, you are totally justified in levelling a comparative lack of creativity at TLoU, especially in comparison with Columbia. In many ways it reminds me of Uncharted - they take a very tried and true genre or mix of genres and put their own spin on it.

That said, Winter is possibly the best act, so you're a crazy person :D - j/k

You should ask this question later and not right after Last of Us is released.

Bioshock for me...main difference? I wanted to replay Bioshock multiple times to experience more of the gameplay. I have zero reason to return to Last of Us singleplayer once I've seen the story play out (the gameplay just isn't that great, and it's kinda buggy). Also Columbia was such a well crafted and original world (to a certain extent) that was fun to explore and discover. The world in LoU is just another variation on something I've seen countless times in videogames.

It's all matter of opinion, but there's some serious hyperbole thrown around these two games. "game of the millenium", "10/10", "the perfect game"....I dunno it's all really seems overblown, especially since these games have only been out for less than a year. They are both great games that might have an impact on future video games, but they ain't earth shattering masterpieces the likes of which come once a decade.

I don't know about you guys, but Winter and everything that came after it was pretty intense.

I had a great time with both games, but since TLoU is still fresh in my mind, that one takes the cake. Elizabeth and Ellie are both sweethearts, though.

@vinny_says said:

Maybe? Maybe not. I think I can trust a lot of people to try and put their feelings into context and come at the poll from a level-headed standpoint. Certainly not everyone will do so, but many have and will. The responses here have been really interesting, so I'll happily stand by my decision.

That said - I can see your viewpoint on possible hyperbole, but I don't agree. For example, the first time I played God of War 2, I knew it was special (and it remains widely regarded as one of the best character action games ever made). Same goes for Persona 4 / Golden, or Final Fantasy 7, or Mass Effect 2, or Uncharted 2, or the original Guild Wars, or Valkyria Chronicles, or Ghost Trick, etc, etc. Games which left me feeling awed, and continue to be regarded highly despite the passage of time.

A person's initial reaction from a game is certainly tainted by immediacy, but it is also that reaction which crystallises your feelings about the game even years from first playing it. Not only that, we each enter and leave an experience with foreknowledge of all we have encountered before it, so I don't think many people turn around and say "wait, that game I really enjoyed was SHIT." Unless, of course, you let your feelings be shifted by public opinion.

Either way, I honestly do not think the 10/10s for The Last of Us OR Bioshock: Infinite should be disregarded. I put stock in reviewers, and beyond that, I put stock in that feeling a good game leaves with you after finishing it. It hasn't lead me wrong thus far.

IMO The Last of Us is one of the games which defines this generation. I do not think that opinion will change (though, of course, you are more than welcome to disagree).

Too Human

BioShock Infinite has extremely average FPS gameplay carried by awesome art design and a cool ending.

The Last of Us is all around fantastic, aside from some weird AI niggles. (alerting one thing alerts every single creature even if they are very far away, and sometimes infected after being alerted will just run around aimlessly)

It's great that Last of Us made resources and ammo so scarce with the feeling that every item counts, I played through on hard and it really felt like a survival experience. The gore is also impressive, it's nothing too extreme but somehow a little creepy and very gritty.

I would say that the over all game play experience was better in The Last of Us. Bioshock's ending caused me to think about it more, and do research after the fact, where as The Last of Us was an actual ending. In other words, I felt very satisfied at the end of that game. I can't say one is better than the other, because I enjoyed them both very much. More games with great stories!

BioShock's story was incredibly interesting from an intellectual standpoint. Yes, there was some great emotion to it as well, especially in the quieter moments, but at the end of the day the appeal is in watching all the pieces of the puzzle slam together in the final moments. The Last of Us, on the other hand, is simply great storytelling. There's a real grittiness to the characters that makes them instantly believable and easy to relate to. We love them, then hate them, then hate ourselves for loving them again. And there's nothing I enjoy more than a melancholic ending.