The Last of Us Franchise - Because it's apparently a franchise now. This thread has been double-DMCA’d by Sony Interactive Entertainment.

LightDragonman1 said:
You know, I have noticed that I a lot of people are pointing to that review by Girlfriend Reviews as proof that we simply didn't understand the game's theme, which was apparently "forgiveness", not revenge, and that we didn't give the game enough of a chance and are just looking at the surface, and that we are too upset about Joel's death that we are letting it cloud our judgement.






What do you guys think of said review?
Click to expand...
I hope they forgive me not wasting my time with their shitty review
 
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Scarface1, FuckedUp, Ashen One and 5 others
LightDragonman1 said:
You know, I have noticed that I a lot of people are pointing to that review by Girlfriend Reviews as proof that we simply didn't understand the game's theme, which was apparently "forgiveness", not revenge, and that we didn't give the game enough of a chance and are just looking at the surface, and that we are too upset about Joel's death that we are letting it cloud our judgement.






What do you guys think of said review?
Click to expand...

If the story is about forgiveness. It should be in the hands of the player. They should have the choice of drowning Abby or letting her live. Not a prescribed cut scene.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Rakdos92, Scarface1, Wärring Ornac and 10 others
LightDragonman1 said:
You know, I have noticed that I a lot of people are pointing to that review by Girlfriend Reviews as proof that we simply didn't understand the game's theme, which was apparently "forgiveness", not revenge, and that we didn't give the game enough of a chance and are just looking at the surface, and that we are too upset about Joel's death that we are letting it cloud our judgement.






What do you guys think of said review?
Click to expand...
i'm not even going to look at it. if the story was about forgiveness and written by an actual competent, abby wouldn't have killed joel immediately. she would have thought twice and been internally conflicted considering he SAVED HER GODDAMN LIFE FIVE MINUTES PRIOR -- hell, it would have been a good time to explore that from her perspective. maybe she let joel go that time, but then they meet again, maybe he's the one that needs saving, and she does nothing and lets him die while ellie's witness. she's pissed off but she doesn't have a good reason to hunt down the WLF, but maybe she does anyways because she blames them for joel's death all the same. THEN MAYBE we have a more compelling story instead of "hey guys remember that one scene in bioshock? watch me do a shitty rip off."
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: PumpkinSpiceBitchMeringue, Scarface1, Wärring Ornac and 6 others
SuiSui1 said:
If the story is about forgiveness. It should be in the hands of the player. They should have the choice of drowning Abby or letting her live. Not a prescribed cut scene.
Click to expand...

The main difference between movies and videogames is interactivity and player choice. So when a 'Director' (ugh...) of a videogames decides not to offer the player a choice when they could, I presume it's because they're afraid the player will choose the wrong choice.

Of course, this is stupid. It's a game. Give us a bad ending if you want, we can reload and try it a different way.

Holy shit, I can't believe I'm actually saying Life is Strange 2 is better than this game.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Wärring Ornac, FuckedUp, Sundae and 9 others
Medafag said:
Sadly, things have been like that for the last couple decades, gaming has become some sort of "safe haven" for people who want to feel "validated", as if the only way they can feel they're sophisticated adults is by the media they consume, but that's the thing, most of them have the most shallow or childish tastes, when it comes to books, they grew up reading Harry Potter, and never moved on to read better books, when it comes to movies, they mostly watch capeshit and Disney remakes, but when it comes to videogames, most of these people are too dumb to run and jump on a platformer, or move and shoot on a FPS, or manage an inventory and solve puzzles on a horror game, so what kind of games most gamers latch on to nowadays? glorified walking simulators, where you do nothing but walk on straight line for 12 hours and press X every now and then, videogames that pretty much play themselves, and these people go "See?, this game is for mature people such as myself!, everyone is sad and miserable and the game it's not fun at all!, and that's a good thing!"
Click to expand...

And they never, ever, ever, play building or strategy games. A few rounds of Total Warhammer 2 is so far beyond them it's not even funny. To say nothing of taming a death world in Alpha Centauri, or trying not to freeze your nuts off in Frostpunk,

Speaking of which, can we talk about how Frostpunk did the whole emotional attachment in the post apocalypse so much better? Because it did. Unlike Last of Us 2, Frostpunk is not a cozy catastrophe. While there are no hordes of mushroom zombies and reavers, there is the fact that the climate is getting gradually colder and colder and colder and there's nothing to do about it. In game terms, this means that the temperature starts at a relatively nice -20 Celsius and drops as low as -150 Celsius (at the end of Story Mode), and all you have is a mob of tired, frightened survivors (who all have individual names). And it's up to you to give them hope and help them survive. Of course, if you play on Endless Mode, because of the mathematical progression of the way the game determines what's going to happen next, you'll end up freezing to death eventually. You have to make decisions as to how society will be shaped to adapt to the ongoing catastrophe. Do you pick the "quick fix" option like instituting child labour, harvesting the organs of dead survivors, soup and similar because it's a matter of life and death, at the expense of the groundwork for a recovery and the people's hope, or do you pass that up in favour of trying to preserve the fabric of society but risking dying out from the crisis. No script needing the plot to happen here.

Also, Harry Potter was a mistake. And I fear that Hunger Games (aka That Battle Royale Rip-Off with Archer Wahmen) is heading for the same status. I blame Harry Potter for the current prevalence of bugmen. They identify with the protagonist, who is basically Trustafarian Jesus, to the point at which they see everything in black and white terms. They are the hero who will always win because they're on the right side of history and anyone who opposes them is Voldemort, a paper villain with no motive beyond "for teh evulz" and who gets bumped off after half a page near the end by some bullshit deus ex machina.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Uranus Pink, Capsaicin Addict, More AWS-8Q Than You and 8 others
LightDragonman1 said:
You know, I have noticed that I a lot of people are pointing to that review by Girlfriend Reviews as proof that we simply didn't understand the game's theme, which was apparently "forgiveness", not revenge, and that we didn't give the game enough of a chance and are just looking at the surface, and that we are too upset about Joel's death that we are letting it cloud our judgement.






What do you guys think of said review?
Click to expand...

A serial killer that moves across the country murdering men for their first name only is beyond absolution. This is the shittiest story possible for 'forgiveness'.

LightDragonman1 said:
Also, Just Write liked the game:

Click to expand...

Then I suggest you disregard his opinion on writing because he doesn't know shit.

EDIT:
Its so easy to predict pretentious English lit dicksuckers love this game.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Uranus Pink, BR55, Scarface1 and 6 others
Marissa Moira said:
what the fuck are these?
View attachment 1421718

View attachment 1421719

View attachment 1421722

View attachment 1421726
Click to expand...

What Polygon means is "American devs". Asian Devs don't make blobby messes, and even UK devs have characters like Seuna, who's probably closer to what Druckmann "wanted" but she was made slightly disturbing for the reason of story.

Hypnopedosnake2 said:
During this whole autistic drama, it again dawned something on me that drives me mental since several years now.

Let's put aside the fact if Last of us part 2 is a bad game or not (it actually is), but there is something else that i got from all these people praising this game. They say how mature gaming has become, they say how gaming is a piece of art and how gaming is so much more serious.

Do Gamers really have such an inferiority complex, that they feel like they need to be seen as more then what they are? I am a gamer and all i care about is that games are supposed to be fun.

Fun has become a bad word with these kinds of people.
Click to expand...

They're not Gamers. This isn't "gatekeeping" in a statement or anything. Gaming to a lot of these critics and auteurs isn't an actual primary hobby to them. The problem is these are the people which made it back into a dirty word as they marched in and colonised the space. They're not interested in the "fun" in the traditional way. To them, fun is philsophical questions, story beats and other things that a lot of stuff their english literature degrees will otherwise be utterly useless for.

It's kind of the same way that, casual gamers aren't really gamers and just buy the sports and gun games every year without fail.

That's not to say either position is invalid, or that the "traditional" gamer isn't valid as well, it's just the philosopher/auteur arseholes are the ones in charge of gaming journalism and "setting the narrative." they're a noisy fucking minority, as always, that know to scream the loudest and get noticed.

Dysnomia said:
I was actually wondering about the braindeadness of this decision. Could it be that Mel was originally not supposed to be pregnant and it was added after most of the voices had already been recorded? It was just added for edgy shock value?

That might not be the case and it's just bad writing. But it seems odd that a pregnant woman would be on the front lines for no reason whatsoever. Sitting on her pregnancy reveal for post-mortem shock value seems bizarre. But then again we are dealing with a story that is highschool level fanfiction quality. Druckmann might think this is th darkest and more gritty reveal ever. Look at the edgedark tragedy!

Honestly, it couldn't get any worse if Abby was revealed to be a werewolf and all the dogs Ellie killed were her pack mates. Oh, and Ellie's half vampire, half demon, half angel.
Click to expand...

It does smell hideously of "I need a shock moment!" as Druckmann Torture Porns Ellie some more. He rips himself a fat line of coke and spots that one of his employees is pregnant and has his lightbulb moment before furiously writing.

I pointed out you'd likely see a return to certain roles that can be done anywhere for women and permit double duty, but it's the reeing progressives vision of a nightmare as it means you're weaving, seamstressing and cooking at home.

Mel should've been bumped, even if only temporarily down to cooking duty to keep her safe but nope. The WLF is somehow fighting for the "old murica" which includes all its selfishness and stupidity. Doesn't matter that these guys are, by this point, all children of the post-fungal plague world, they still have the same philosophy and attitudes of non-collapse 2020!

Honestly, the more you think on it, the more I think Druckmann watched Terrible Writing Advice and thought JP Beaubein was playing it straight.


Pokemonquistador2 said:
(I will admit, a post-apocalypse story about a bunch of progressive people fighting to maintain their progressive values in a world that can no longer sustain them would make for good drama. But such an honest exploration and critique of Progressivism would be far too triggering for people like Niel who are convinced that they'll always be on the Right Side of History, and that it will always be possible to toss thin 17 year old girls into front line battles and have them hold their own like seasoned Marines. )
Click to expand...

They'd become curiosities almost instantly. Progressivism only works in an era of increasing plenty and food. You have time to worry about the snide remark because you're a woman, or the fact you prefer men but need to keep the population growing. It became prominent in a time of population growth and the maturation of industrialisation for a reason.

If you wanted to play on that sort of weird angle, you'd get some genuinely uncomfortable concepts and ideas coming to the fore.

You'd see evolution and change no matter what to the "original ideas." so maybe a revival of co-operatives as functions and companies, with corporations and monopolies/companies owned by a sole person banned altogether. Problem is, while Co-operatives tend to be more stable... they also tend to wobble a lot in a crisis as there's no "proper" central leadership to steady the ship.

Perhaps some progressive language will remain and continue to force its weird evolution, so "motherhood" vanishes and perhaps gets replaced by "lifebringer" and lets women be placed on the massive pedestal they'd get in any post apoc society that still wants to be around.

But then you run into issues.... what about gay people? Lesbians are an active problem in a society because they might not want kids, or be repulsed by the need to create new life. How can they retain their individuality and sexuality in a society which is going to need kids to be made and a lot of them?

What about family? Will kids just become village/society children practically dumped by their parents? A lot of progressive values move away from the nuclear family and sure as hell hasn't found an alternative. You're going to see huge portions of the population chewed up by single parents basically stuck in parenting for 80% of their time unless you formulated a proper (and resource expensive) schooling system.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Uranus Pink, Rakdos92, Scarface1 and 6 others
Prester John said:
If the game is about forgiveness, then the game is a failure if the player doesn't forgive Abby, or at least understand Ellie's actions at the end.

The review says that if you still want to kill Abby at the end, then you the player failed the game. No, the burden is on the game to tell its story and convey its message.

I do not understand what convinced Ellie to spare Abby at the end. And if the game wanted to give meaning to Ellie's mercy, they should have shown something good come of it, like Abby and Lev starting an orphanage or something. But no, all the game shows us is that Ellie lost everything and can't play guitar anymore.

I don't think the game really has any message at the end; it's just a misery simulator.
Click to expand...

More and more, games are becoming a vehicle for writers to preach at us. Incidentally, the thing I hate most about Undertale isn't its army of deranged weeb fans, it's the fact that the game scraped its finger at us and said "SHAME!" everytime we killed an attacking enemy. AS if we knew there were always pacifist alternatives to direct attacks when first starting out in the game. It even tricked us into killing Goat Mom by making us think we were having a typical "reduce their hitpoints down to zero during the battle, but they're still alive in the Cutscene after" RPG fight, when we were actually killing her for real. In what world would "Pacifism At All Costs in All Circumstances" ever be a viable survival strategy? Why would we want to create games that teach kids never to attack those who are trying to kill then, plz find alternatives instead? Try that shit in real life, and you'll get shivved before you can even open your mouth to negotiate. And then the game lays on some preachy bullshit about how killing even one enemy is bad and it tucks the best ending behind a wall if you kill even one person. Even if that person is trying to murder you and even if your killing of them is a total accident. Get fucked, game!

Wanna know a game that taught compassion and mercy well? Disgaea. It was a tactics game about a cute Demon Lord whose Dad was trying to teach him some basic morality. In the game, if you killed one of your own ALLIES in battle (even by mistake), you didn't get the best ending. But this is an ally; you can kill as many enemies as you want without consequence. If your character killed a certain number of his own allies, you got a bad ending, and if he killed even more of his men, his chief subordinate would kill him and take over. The game teaches that you should care about the people that work for you, and not get reckless with their lives. It doesn't teach that you should be a simp and let your enemies run roughshod over you - quite the opposite in fact. (Although, the game, at the end rewards you showing mercy to the main enemy after defeating him, - but this act of mercy occurs after a lot of main character development and has a good reason for happening.)

Wanna know why I love Disgaea? Because it has a likable cast of characters that act like normal people, even though they're a bunch of demons and weirdos. Undertale also has a likable cast and most of its characters act relatably, but the preachy Pacifism crap really sours my experience with the game. TLOU2 tosses all verisimilitude out the window and has a cast of puppets whose only purpose is to push Druckman's social agenda. Oh, and the game makes the main character feel bad for killing sympathetic animals and people when she had no other choice. At least Undertale let you take the pacifist option in every battle, even if it tried to beat you over the head with its message.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Uranus Pink, Rakdos92, Scarface1 and 14 others
Ponderous Pillock said:
They're not Gamers. This isn't "gatekeeping" in a statement or anything. Gaming to a lot of these critics and auteurs isn't an actual primary hobby to them. The problem is these are the people which made it back into a dirty word as they marched in and colonised the space.
Click to expand...

101% this. It's the same with so-called "geek culture" being about capeshit and Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. No it fucking isn't. That's the theme park version of geek culture. Have any of these people actually sat down and played Dungeons & Dragons other than 4E or later, you know, when it got all normiefied because they wanted to attract bugmen so made it more like a fucking MMO with everyone having tons of abilities and cooldown timers, and the idea that being a frontliner was boring because all you got was "swing at them again" while the casters got to blow shit up. Which in turn was the fault of 3E's massive balance issues and Ivory Tower game design what with certain classes and skills and feats being deliberately bad to "reward" veteran players, for instance.

Have any of these people ever attempted to code? Even a hello world? No. They just move into it in an ironic hipster manner and turn it into a theme park version of itself. They've wrecked comix, Star Wars, and gaming.

(God, I miss AD&D 2E. It had its faults, and some of the later products were untested and janky as fuck (psionics in particular) and its biggest flaw (linear warriors, quadratic wizards) was because nobody played the whole "high level fighters are warlords with hordes of henchmen" rules. But it didn't need miniatures, it didn't demand optimisation of your character to be effective, and once your party gelled together they started to make up for each others' flaws. Yeah, your wizard might have loads of explody fun spells but he only has a few HP and his armour class is not that great relative, and defensive spells like stoneskin and mantle use up valuable slots that could be spent on more nuking, and besides they don't last very long, esp. when the enemy frontliners are up in his face with multiple attacks per round.)
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Uranus Pink, bigoogabaloogas, Rakdos92 and 6 others
Ginger Piglet said:
101% this. It's the same with so-called "geek culture" being about capeshit and Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. No it fucking isn't. That's the theme park version of geek culture. Have any of these people actually sat down and played Dungeons & Dragons other than 4E or later, you know, when it got all normiefied because they wanted to attract bugmen so made it more like a fucking MMO with everyone having tons of abilities and cooldown timers, and the idea that being a frontliner was boring because all you got was "swing at them again" while the casters got to blow shit up. Which in turn was the fault of 3E's massive balance issues and Ivory Tower game design what with certain classes and skills and feats being deliberately bad to "reward" veteran players, for instance.

Have any of these people ever attempted to code? Even a hello world? No. They just move into it in an ironic hipster manner and turn it into a theme park version of itself. They've wrecked comix, Star Wars, and gaming.

(God, I miss AD&D 2E. It had its faults, and some of the later products were untested and janky as fuck (psionics in particular) and its biggest flaw (linear warriors, quadratic wizards) was because nobody played the whole "high level fighters are warlords with hordes of henchmen" rules. But it didn't need miniatures, it didn't demand optimisation of your character to be effective, and once your party gelled together they started to make up for each others' flaws. Yeah, your wizard might have loads of explody fun spells but he only has a few HP and his armour class is not that great relative, and defensive spells like stoneskin and mantle use up valuable slots that could be spent on more nuking, and besides they don't last very long, esp. when the enemy frontliners are up in his face with multiple attacks per round.)
Click to expand...
You're basically talking about a long standing problem that's existed as far back as the 1950's.

You're talking about posers.

If anything is highly merchandised they're going to exist in that space because the barrier for entry is just buying a bunch of random shit at low cost.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Uranus Pink, Rakdos92, madethistocomment and 6 others
Marissa Moira said:
You're talking about posers.
Click to expand...
REEEE how dare you complain about Fake Geek Girls! THOSE DON'T EXIST REEEEE!!!

Ginger Piglet said:
frontliner was boring because all you got was "swing at them again" while the casters got to blow shit up.
Click to expand...
To be fair, this was an entirely valid complaint. I've Played 3.5, 4E and The "Beta Test" of 5..and playing Melee in 4E is the only time playing Melee felt compelling. Hell go look at the Class Review Thread that is over in gaming and just look at how many classes that don't get some sort of spell casting end up in the "Don't fucking touch this" tier.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
Reactions: Uranus Pink, Iodised Ant, Sundae and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back