The first time you see that Shambler kill the guys while you're above. I was like Ok fine at least I don't have to fight one yet. Then you drop down and there's fecking two of them there. Then you try sneak past only to realize you can't open the fecking gate chains without alerting them and you've to kill the feckers anyway. Feck you, naughty dog!
Gaming The Last of Us Part II (PS4)
- Thread starter Neelu
- Start date
Glad to see most of you are enjoying it. I'll pick this up later in the year when it's on discount. Too many games in the library still untouched (God of War, Red Dead II) due to time constraints. And the fact some of the reviewers I trust panned the story and pacing of the game doesn't exactly make me impatient to play it either.
Whilst I can understand this, I also don't reallyI spent the first part of the game looking at everything and all the details that had been added to the game. I thought it was great. Sometimes when playing I just stop and admire the view.
Absolutely. I really enjoy the pacing. If it was ram packed with stuff and action all the time, you wouldn’t see everything and appreciate the time and effort that’s been put into the world. It’s amazing.
I actually find myself walking more than running to better soak it up and it somehow makes it all the more immersive for me, I’m in no rush.
As a game it just oozes quality. You can see every minute of effort and every cent Naughty Dog has invested right there on the screen. It's beautiful in the most dank and grisly ways imaginable. I genuinely love it.
I know this dude to be most forgiving and positive "reviewer" out there and even he didn't like the story delivery, pacing etc. Polarizing game like this can't be "best game ever made" no matter how hard some journos want it to be, first one was universally beloved, this one, not really, it will not be in the TLOU, The Witcher 3 etc tier after some time.
This is a great sentence from a CV journo:
This is a great sentence from a CV journo:
In trying to subvert expectations, The Last of Us Part II discards the best aspects of its predecessor to provide a rote revenge tale that is ill-considered, ending on a note that makes everything — all the violence, all the loss, all the struggle — feel utterly, hopelessly pointless.
If some journos think it is the best game ever, than it's their best game ever, simple. There doesn't have to be any universal consensus for that. You almost seem offended that people actually like it that much.
You seem so desperate to justify your post about agendas.
You have yet to address that issue and have now just piled in with the gamers and reviewers who have managed to articulate their issues with the game.
Your constant justification for why you're not buying this game is getting tedious and while you like to pretend that everyone else chose to misinterpret your words it's pretty obvious what your issue was.
Because, despite your protestations your original post pointed at all the "agenda pushing" your reason for not buying it. Now your trying to claim that all along you meant that you disliked the narrative direction.
It doesn't work like that, universal consensus is exactly there to put games in that category, many people don't like open world RPGs but admit TW3 is in that tier because of that. I mean, it is MUCH harder to make such an open world RPG with so many story choices possibilities than games like this one, Uncharted etc that are linear storytelling. You can adore this game and still be objective, there are many games that are top tier for me personally but I can see why they are not in the eyes of general public.
I am not offended, just talking about it, nothing more. If anything, I see people being offended whenever they see someone talking about this game without praising it to high heavens.
You keep talking about "agendas" and I will talk about real game issues, that is fine with me. Cheers.
It's really not the best game ever, guys.
It's only been polarised if you bother paying attention to the thousands of users who review bombed it when they clearly hadn't even played the game. The thousands of users like yourself, who screamed 'agenda' when they read the leaks and pushed themselves prematurely into the anti-LOS2 camp.
The critics, who have actually bothered to play it before forming an opinion, almost universally love it.
The majority of people on the Caf also seem to like or love it.
If you play it for what it is - a game - and not a political hot potato, I'm sure even you would be able to recognise it's many obvious qualities.
I find discussions about universal consensus tiresome and pointless. How do you measure universal consensus? Metacritic ratings? User ratings? The amount of people complaining on Twitter, Reddit, Youtube, etc? We were doing just fine in this thread giving our own actual opinions and having a civil discussion about it (in spoiler tags obviously), even though they were conflicting opinions. The moment you throw universal consensus in there it becomes something intangible and impossible to discuss.
It doesn't work like that, universal consensus is exactly there to put games in that category, many people don't like open world RPGs but admit TW3 is in that tier because of that. I mean, it is MUCH harder to make such an open world RPG with so many story choices possibilities than games like this one, Uncharted etc that are linear storytelling. You can adore this game and still be objective, there are many games that are top tier for me personally but I can see why they are not in the eyes of general public.
I am not offended, just talking about it, nothing more. If anything, I see people being offended whenever they see someone talking about this game without praising it to high heavens.
You keep talking about "agendas" and I will talk about real game issues, that is fine with me. Cheers.
You brought it up and as I've said to you before, you are now are too scared to own it.
I don't think anyone in here takes anything you say serious anyways, you've not even got it ffs and your in here lecturing people who are telling you it's good. Even some who originally said they didn't plan on buying it have since accepted they may have spoken a bit too soon with their criticism based on the leaks.
But you continue to bury your head in the sand and I'll keep calling you out to justify your original bigoted post. I assume eventually I'll end up like @Mr Pigeon and end up on your ignore list, but hopefully @Redlambs keeps up the good fight.
There are tons of legit criticism if you ignore review bombing, but as I can see, you choose to generalize it all in the same basket so yeah, you are not actually aware.
And I am NOT talking about game in general, I was never saying game is shit in general, neither I mentioned politics anywhere, I was always talking only about the story part of it which I CAN judge as I watched the whole game.
Yeah, keep fighting the fantasy fight. I am rooting for you.
I didn't even say anything bad about the game, just said some sensible things and people start jumping on them straight away, and then I am the one offended? What even? Is this "TLOU2 praising only" thread? Just ignore my post if it hits you so bad, I don't go around attacking everyone that is saying how amazing the story is, do I. Bloody hell.
Last edited:
I think when more people have finished it on here we can be more objective and discuss the game as a whole. At the moment other than a couple of people it is people who have seen the spoilers and people who have played half a game. I certainly have one of criticism in terms of gameplay but don't want to make a final judgement until I've finished the whole thing. I've kept away from the spoilers so have deliberately stayed away from Metacritic, reviews etc.
As it stands, I'm two thirds of the way in and it is clearly a stand-out game in this generation and a masterpiece in terms of atmosphere and world creation. This is in my opinion and when it comes down to it that's all that matters as I'm the one who's paid the money.
Anyone who watches reviews or even lets plays rather than experiencing this game for themselves is a bit silly imo.
It’s a really great game, it’s definitley one of my favourites.
If you’ve played it and don’t like it more power to you, but if your experience with the game is someone like Cohh or critikal telling you whether or not you should like it then I’m a little embarrassed for you.
It’s a really great game, it’s definitley one of my favourites.
If you’ve played it and don’t like it more power to you, but if your experience with the game is someone like Cohh or critikal telling you whether or not you should like it then I’m a little embarrassed for you.
I don't think you can judge the game or even it's story fairly at this point. You watched a bunch of contextless cut scenes, jumped on the hate train and made some questionable comments that have made everyone think your motives for disliking it are coming from a bad place.
Sorry but your opinion of the game, even if it is just on the story isn't worth very much to people who are actually playing it and experiencing the game as it was intended. I'm far more accepting of people's issues with it if I know they actually played the game.
I watched Skill Ups review before release and it had me quite concerned, because as a reviwer I think he's one of the best out there. Now even though I'm just halfway through I'm finding I'm disagreeing with him on alot of things. And that's fine, he didn't really like the first game all that much so I guess these games just aren't for him.
I agree about atmosphere and the world, only thing I can't talk about is the actual gameplay.
No one is telling my what I should like or not, I am just trying to show people legit, constructive criticisms because lots of people seem to think only trolls and review bombers don't like the game which can't be further from the truth. That's all, if there is anything I hate it is generalization.
Nope, I watched full playthrough.
You’ve said it won’t be seen alongside the top tier of games in the future despite having never played it. If what you’re trying to say is that I should take on what Cohh has said because he’s played it and not what you are saying then we’re in agreement.
Cohhs criticisms are legit, even if I disagree, yours aren’t.
if there's one thing I learnt from all my time playing games is that the best way to judge how good a game is is to watch all the cutscenes and not play the game.
Game can not be in top tier with polarizing story like this, not really top tier, I was talking about GOAT tier or something before, top tier for me is tier below.
You are following and watching story with your eyes, not your hands, so yeah, you can judge it without playing it. I don't understand how this concept is so hard to understand.
I could be wrong here but I'm pretty sure that even when playing the game, you're not using your hands to follow the story.
The tiers you put it in don’t matter, you haven’t played the game. It’s clear that you haven’t given it a fair chance if you haven’t even bothered to play the game.
But you're not though, are you. At least now in that post on this page about how many people dislike it and therefore it can't be "the best game ever" or whatever. There's nothing constructive about that. Compare that to someone like @padr81 who gave some very specific criticism while he was playing and whom several posters engaged with in a civil discussion about those points. That's legit criticism. You've been unable to provide that, unless you did it in one of your spoilered posts, in which case fair enough. But that particular post certainly wasn't it.
And like I said, I watched full playthrough, not only cutscenes. So this is pointless.
As one of the other major critics I can honestly say gameplay seems more boring on the lets plays. I never thought I'd give this game a 7/10 based on LP's and videos I saw but when you play it you can see why people are drawn to it and even enjoy it. I'll finish it for morbid curiosity alone.
Despite all my issues there is something compelling about it.
Calling it polarising implies people are somewhat evenly split on if it's good or not, which isn't true.
I don't like the story but I understand I'm in the minority.
I don't like the story but I understand I'm in the minority.
Why would you even bother to watch the full 25 or 30 hour playthrough of a game you'd already said you wouldn't like after reading the leaks? What's the point?
If I knew a film was going to be shit based on the story of it I wouldn't go waste 2 hours of my life watching it just to justify that I was right about it being crap, let alone 30 fecking hours
I work at home on the PC whole day, so having it on the side is not a big deal, so yeah, I wouldn't call that wasting hours.
I will play through it....some day, when it's cheap, but doubt will ever go back to it several times after that like I did with TLOU 1.
All that I heard about these games is - great story but pretty boring game. The kind of game that those who know little about what makes a great game go nuts for - all style and no substance.
I've only got to about 10hrs as I've been ill, but so far it's...ok. Decent is a better word. Graphically it's obviously great, and so far the story (whilst a bit weak) isn't an issue. I think I need to separate my thoughts on it all:
Graphics: I mean there isn't much that needs to be said about the look, it's exceptionally well done. Up there with the top tier PS games. There are a few minor niggles with the HDR implementation, but overall it's very impressive. However, there are a few downfalls that I really haven't seen mentioned much, if at all (not surprising). The FPS is pretty well capped near enough to 30 for the most part, which although sucks for me is fine for most, however it DOES definitely drop. The reason you aren't noticing how much is the frame smoothing, so when the frames get hit you don't see a "drop" as such, the transition is smoother. So that's not too bad, even for me, however it does cause two problems the first graphical, the second comes in the gameplay section. In the gfx terms, again none of you will probably notice or care, but I hate motion blur in games however you really can't turn it lower than 4 in this (4k hdr that is) as it's being used to blur out some rather nasty graphic glitches and screen tears. Not a deal breaker, but the issues are there. The next one, however affect:
Gameplay: Overall it's functional enough. I mean that's not exactly highest praise, but then the game is pretty much PS3 quality remastered. I like the feel of the weapons and impacts, but the actual aiming and camera are still so smoothed it's frustrating to me. Also, a huge problem it has that again, no one seems to have noticed or cared about, is that the variable framerate seems to have issues with the hit reg/collision boxes. It makes the gunplay way more random and aiming worse, in actual fact it actually drags the Autoaim away from the target, as what seems to be happening is the hitboxes aren't quite tied to the fps like the models, so they often lag. It's a real bitch for me, though again most won't care. But know this, when you get those shots you are sure you hit but don't seem to register, yeah it's probably not you after all
Another issue I have, although minor in the scheme of things, are the controls are really amateur designed. Anyone who has done a design course, or want to enter the field, knows control 101 plays a huge role. ND once again seem to not know this! I mean the scheme is so confused, has no flow, it relies on player muscle memory and not good design. For example, take the simple action button: Mostly it's triangle, except when it's cross, but even then not on ladders apparently. Oh and then again, not if you have an medkit out to use, then it's right trigger. In the QTE's it's tap, then it's hold with neither giving any feedback. It's all just sort of mashed together, which again we all overcome, but it's still bad design. Oh and trigger for reloading? But also for throwing? It's all over the place
Pace: I think this should be split into 2, as people seem to be talking cross purposes. Gameplay wise, I think it's perfect in terms of breaking up the intense moments with the exploration. I think there's enough to look at and see to take a break in between and that helps make the encounters that much better. One thing that bugs me though, as a loot-hog and an explorer, there's nothing actually to find! It's all very barren in terms of loot and collectables, which is a shame. Story-wise is different, it's a bit bizarre what their goal is. The usual little interactions are cool and all (although have very little, if any of the charm of the original), but the actual story arc is just way off beat. I mean after the first major event, surely the point is to keep the player invested, angry and looking for revenge? So why, about 6hrs after, have I not seen Abby again? I'm assuming I can see where it's going, and if so it makes it even worse because for a story that's supposed to be so personal, it really should flow together. It's frankly sloppy at best to just open up the world and expect the player to still care god knows how many hours later with little going on in between.
A.I: I put this in here because not only is it the worst part of the game, but probably the worst A.I I've encountered in a long time. It's absolute garbage I could go on a long rant about it and the many issues, but I won't. All I'll say is I assume some think it's great because of the little audio cue stuff like calling to their dogs or partners and all that (which are nice tbf), because it certainly can't be because how any single thing that isn't the player behaves in the game!
Agenda: One for the obvious among us. So far I've spotted 2: Bigots are arseholes (I love how they get that straight in as a dig at the morons who read early leaks and believed the agenda stuff) and drugs can lead to awesomeness. Now I'm not sure how either of those are enough "pushing" to stop you buying the game, but there you go
Graphics: I mean there isn't much that needs to be said about the look, it's exceptionally well done. Up there with the top tier PS games. There are a few minor niggles with the HDR implementation, but overall it's very impressive. However, there are a few downfalls that I really haven't seen mentioned much, if at all (not surprising). The FPS is pretty well capped near enough to 30 for the most part, which although sucks for me is fine for most, however it DOES definitely drop. The reason you aren't noticing how much is the frame smoothing, so when the frames get hit you don't see a "drop" as such, the transition is smoother. So that's not too bad, even for me, however it does cause two problems the first graphical, the second comes in the gameplay section. In the gfx terms, again none of you will probably notice or care, but I hate motion blur in games however you really can't turn it lower than 4 in this (4k hdr that is) as it's being used to blur out some rather nasty graphic glitches and screen tears. Not a deal breaker, but the issues are there. The next one, however affect:
Gameplay: Overall it's functional enough. I mean that's not exactly highest praise, but then the game is pretty much PS3 quality remastered. I like the feel of the weapons and impacts, but the actual aiming and camera are still so smoothed it's frustrating to me. Also, a huge problem it has that again, no one seems to have noticed or cared about, is that the variable framerate seems to have issues with the hit reg/collision boxes. It makes the gunplay way more random and aiming worse, in actual fact it actually drags the Autoaim away from the target, as what seems to be happening is the hitboxes aren't quite tied to the fps like the models, so they often lag. It's a real bitch for me, though again most won't care. But know this, when you get those shots you are sure you hit but don't seem to register, yeah it's probably not you after all
Another issue I have, although minor in the scheme of things, are the controls are really amateur designed. Anyone who has done a design course, or want to enter the field, knows control 101 plays a huge role. ND once again seem to not know this! I mean the scheme is so confused, has no flow, it relies on player muscle memory and not good design. For example, take the simple action button: Mostly it's triangle, except when it's cross, but even then not on ladders apparently. Oh and then again, not if you have an medkit out to use, then it's right trigger. In the QTE's it's tap, then it's hold with neither giving any feedback. It's all just sort of mashed together, which again we all overcome, but it's still bad design. Oh and trigger for reloading? But also for throwing? It's all over the place
Pace: I think this should be split into 2, as people seem to be talking cross purposes. Gameplay wise, I think it's perfect in terms of breaking up the intense moments with the exploration. I think there's enough to look at and see to take a break in between and that helps make the encounters that much better. One thing that bugs me though, as a loot-hog and an explorer, there's nothing actually to find! It's all very barren in terms of loot and collectables, which is a shame. Story-wise is different, it's a bit bizarre what their goal is. The usual little interactions are cool and all (although have very little, if any of the charm of the original), but the actual story arc is just way off beat. I mean after the first major event, surely the point is to keep the player invested, angry and looking for revenge? So why, about 6hrs after, have I not seen Abby again? I'm assuming I can see where it's going, and if so it makes it even worse because for a story that's supposed to be so personal, it really should flow together. It's frankly sloppy at best to just open up the world and expect the player to still care god knows how many hours later with little going on in between.
A.I: I put this in here because not only is it the worst part of the game, but probably the worst A.I I've encountered in a long time. It's absolute garbage
I could go on a long rant about it and the many issues, but I won't. All I'll say is I assume some think it's great because of the little audio cue stuff like calling to their dogs or partners and all that (which are nice tbf), because it certainly can't be because how any single thing that isn't the player behaves in the game!Agenda: One for the obvious among us. So far I've spotted 2: Bigots are arseholes (I love how they get that straight in as a dig at the morons who read early leaks and believed the agenda stuff) and drugs can lead to awesomeness. Now I'm not sure how either of those are enough "pushing" to stop you buying the game, but there you go
That's a tad harsh for me, from what I've played so far, but truth be told it's not far from the mark. It's Basically LOU remastered-remastered in gameplay terms.
Then again, if people loved the first, for them is that a bad thing? I mean I hate when sequels are ruined by doing way too much different when you could just have more of what you love. To be honest because of the nature of the world, I don't think they could change it a lot, I guess they certainly could have added more depth though.
Then that’s missing the point of the medium of video games. You are also ‘following the story with your hands’. Video games are a tactile experience, you feel more emphasis in the brutality, you share the fear of the character more because you’re controlling them. At points when I was playing, I was near to having an anxiety attack - an emotion you wouldn’t have had watching someone play it whilst they’re narrating their own experience.
You didn’t experience the story as it was delivered and how it was intended to be consumed. There are flaws, but some of those flaws are absolved through the act of playing.
You pointed to a reviewer who called the plot simple. The overarching theme and plot are quite simple, as with the first game. But it's the internal story, the characterisations (which I personally enjoyed), the structure and the constant motifs that returned throughout the game which make the game, some of which were actual gameplay mechanics i.e. tactile moments. All of this, in my opinion, is unparalleled in terms of story telling for a AAA title.
A lot of people do point to the fact that there are some indie games with better stories, but use Hollywood as a parallel. A lot of the best blockbuster films are quite on the nose, but due to the budget and production values you forgive their flaws. Whereas there are some indie films that tell masterful stories within the constraints of their budget. Is TLOU2 a revelation in story telling? No. Nor was the first one. However, it is a revelation in regards to how a AAA title can convey its story through the medium of gaming. A lot of the choices the characters make are ones that you make as the player, it adds weight to their decisions. The story has a different effect when you are the one controlling the character.
For example, in the first game you run through the hospital indiscriminately killing fireflies and the doctors operating on Ellie. Because, you are the one actually doing it you are more empathetic to Joel. If you watched him do that in a film (or in the green lit TV show) you would think he was a psycho. There would be less nuance to the ending.
Remember that this level of story telling in games industry is relatively new. So for me it is a 10/10. The story isn't a 10/10 compared to the hundreds/thousands of years of books and theatre and the decades of TV and film. However, within its medium I do think it is up there, especially in the effect communicating the story through player interaction actually has on the player. That mixed with the graphics, the game play and the sound make it a masterpiece. Not without its flaws, but it is a seriously impressive piece of gaming history.
Some people obviously like it but to me it just looks like all hype and very little of a game there behind it. Some people may enjoy it and fair play to them but I'd rather play a fun, engaging game rather than pay big bucks for something that probably should just be a movie. Any reviewer that dares suggest it is one of the best games to come out this year are not real gamers and are in the wrong job in my opinion.
The negative reviews pale in comparison with the positive ones. They're a genuine fraction, so why would you so consistently focus on that element?
And you have mentioned politics. The game 'forcing its agenda on people' has been a running joke that's clung to you for months now. Largely because you outright refuse to explain it every time you're asked.
Let's be honest, you dug your hole ages ago and would rather focus on the proportionately small amount of criticism than crawl out.
And yes, there are valid criticisms to be made. No game is perfect. But, with your track record, I doubt anyone will take any of yours seriously.
There are boring moments and sequences, and far far too much looting. But the core gameplay of stealth combat is actually really fun. If you enjoy stealth games. Also when you upgrade certain weapons, and maybe change the difficulty slightly so you find more loot, playing it as a run and gun is seriously fun. The weight of the gun play is fantastic, your shotgun rips through people's bodies. You can shoot an explosive arrow that literally explodes them into a pulp.
You haven't played it, so thats a very odd thing to say. One of the few things many reviewers agree on is that the core gameplay is really fun.
Meh, the more I play the more it's obvious what geko was talking about. Druckmann mentioned it in a tweet too, some of the leaks referred to certain enemies which created a fuss that spilled in the actual game. It can only be that, as there's literally nothing else in the game (at least in the first 10hrs) to suggest any agenda pushing.
He is never going to answer us, because he simply hasn't got an answer that doesn't confirm it. Now the game is out and everyone can see, the wiggle room is gone. People can make their own minds up about how to see him in the future, but I will say that anyone who claims to give a shit about all the right wing nastiness in the world yet won't call it out (or in some cases bitch and moan when others do) you are part of the problem. If you see something, question it. It's not always going to be what you think, but if that person can't give a straight answer even weeks later, then...well...
And if you don't, move on, simple as that. I didn't take lots of opinions on this game seriously and I moved on, didn't cling to their posts.
And I didn't dig any holes, you are digging those imaginary holes trying so hard to make them legit, but they wont be other than in your minds. And that, my dear caftards, are your personal problems that I can't help you with.
This isn’t really fair at all. The gameplay is really engaging, full of suspense and the combat is fun. If you don’t like survival horror type games where you have to manage resources to beat the obstacle presented to you then you won’t like it, but if you do you will. To say it should just be a movie completely misses the point of having the game as an experience.
Again, to suggest people aren’t “real gamers” (which is pretty cringey gatekeeping anyway) if they enjoy the game without having played it is foolish.
I agree totally on the controls with @Redlambs , actually. I thought it was just me but sometimes they are really fecking annoying to remember, especially reload and taking the damn medkits!
People like different things, reviewers are people. Sure there's a hell of a lot of shadiness in that industry, but lot's of people loved the first game and this is pretty much a continuation, so it's no surprise they love this one.
I mean, engaging can be so many different things anyway. If you aren't into a slower, more story driven game then this definitely isn't for you. It's not even the best example of one anyway imo so you won't be missing out even if you like survival action games.