TLOU Remastered Review Thread: 8/10 Gamespot

#101 Edited by Cloud_imperium (5881 posts) -

@YearoftheSnake5 said:

Well, it is basically the same game. 8 isn't a bad score, so I don't see an issue.

Yes , but on system wars it means flop because gamespot reviews and their GOTY awards only matter here . 8 is also a terrible score here .

#102 Posted by Netret0120 (2871 posts) -

Lol at anyone who takes ONE game website's opinion(Gamespot) over Multiple(Metacritic)

I won't purchase this as i already have TLOU but this is easily deserving of 95/100 or more on metacritic

#103 Posted by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@nutcrackr: So well said. Really not much point of a score.

#104 Posted by ZombeGoast (437 posts) -

Taking any review serious of a game that was already released 1 year ago.

#105 Posted by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@Desmonic: Nope. If your opinion is based on incorrect information, then your opinion is wrong by default :P Example: Not believing the damn moon exists because the Bible doesn't mention it. Alas, not the point.

They can, when they write X and don't give the corresponding X number from the scale, picking Y or fucking Σ instead. >.>

Nope. Comparison doesn't work because the moon can be proven to exist simply by looking in the sky. Therefore its ignorance you are correcting. Nobody is ignorant for their opinion of subjective entertainment.

#106 Posted by freedomfreak (43105 posts) -
@tormentos said:

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Yeah, it made you look really cool.

#107 Posted by sHaDyCuBe321 (4245 posts) -

@tormentos said:
@freedomfreak said:

Aaah, memories..

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Zelda ALBW was GOTY

#108 Posted by foxhound_fox (90633 posts) -

I'm going to laugh when it starts winning PS4 GOTY awards.

#109 Posted by MonsieurX (31586 posts) -

The best available on PS4?

Poor Infamous and KZ:SF :(

#110 Posted by sHaDyCuBe321 (4245 posts) -

Good game overall. Not the best of all time by a longshot. It had some really bad buddy AI. The single player would be an 8-8.5. The gameplay was well crafted, but in general nothing new or inspiring. It didn't do anything new, it just did everything really well.

The story was generic and pretty lackluster until you get to Winter. Out of all of the portions of the game, Winter really was a standout.

What really bumped this game up to a 9 for me was the multiplayer. It was addicting as hell. I loved every second of it. Good purchase for those who have never played it. Complete ripoff for those who have.

#112 Posted by Heil68 (46851 posts) -

Awesome. Will definitely play.

#113 Edited by Zelda187 (1047 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

GS review is up brah

8/10. Again.

inb4 massive cow rage!

Rage?

LOL

Why would this be unsuspected?

It's the same exact game with slightly improved visuals. Why would that suddenly bump up the rating? I don't even see why they bothered to review it again.

#114 Posted by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@Cloud_imperium: I was under the impression its only a flop if it has an official, voted on hype and doesn't meet it. There was no hype voted on for TLOUR so its not a flop

#115 Posted by Phazevariance (11063 posts) -

Lol flop again. The game is good, but some of the corridor shooter stuff in the first half of the game really got boring for me. It wasn't until it opened up that it got better

#116 Posted by darkangel115 (2215 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@charizard1605 said:

@elkoldo said:

Another 8.lol at gamespot because of their ridiculous persistence in their wrongful judgement.It seems like they'll never have the guts to face the fact that they mistreated the game last year.

Even this time the new reviewer hasn't highlighted any weak points in the game (MacShea had at least made a few stupid statements in this effect) yet rated it 8 again.They just don't have the guts to accept their mistake.

Or, maybe, you know, they just don't think it's worth more than an 8.

Is that so high for some of you to understand?

Brother , you don't need to get panic and insult me.I know you work for GS and hence feel the urge to defend them ,but see how sensible it sounds.Tommy had stated at least a few (irrational)weak points in the game ,and therefore his rating was justifiable , but Carolyn hasn't almost mentioned any weaknesses in the game and still rated it 8 !

After you stand down as a GS moderator , when you no longer feel the urge to defend GS , like many other ex-mods I know ,you will understand how ridiculous and cowardly Carolyn was.GS still thinks the game's not worth more than 8 while the rest of the world rate it 95 on average and you think I have an understanding problem.

Anyway if all of the GS staff happen to think the game's not worth more than 8 ,especially even when they plaintively fail to find a weak point or two to justify their rating ,it sounds like a re-run of a secret version of the Kayne and Lynch Dead Men scenario to me.You know I get very pessimist at times.

Lol come on, you have an ellie avatar, maybe you just loved it more then the reviewer? Look I've seen a ton of 10/10 reviews. i played it last year. it was good and I feel an 8 is a good score for it personally. A lot of the 10/10 guys don't even talk about the combat (and how poor it is with the "auto hard cover system" or how slow the aiming is and the poor AI) nobody talks about the MP (which is a bad clone of UC/TR MP) As a story experience and the graphics for its time on 8 year old hardware, its an extremely impressive game, however the game has a lot of flaws that reviewers have "ignored" but have used against other games to lower their score. I mean the game was buggy and glicthy as hell, suffered from bad framerate drops, the MP is a terrible lag fest and the list goes on. In the end, TLOU was a frustrating game that took me way to long to finish (3 months) because i never really felt the need to play it, I just eventually got around to beating it and never bothered to get the PS4 version.

#117 Posted by kuu2 (7918 posts) -

Cool, maybe when the PauperStation4 drops in price I will get it.

#118 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

The Floppage returns!

#119 Posted by PrincessGomez92 (3788 posts) -

Dang, cows just can't catch a break.

#120 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Desmonic said:

GS review is up brah

8/10. Again.

inb4 massive cow rage!

Rage?

LOL

Why would this be unsuspected?

It's the same exact game with slightly improved visuals. Why would that suddenly bump up the rating? I don't even see why they bothered to review it again.

Well Left behind got a 9. Also, many believed it only got an 8 because it was reviewed by mcshea

#121 Edited by DEadliNE-Zero0 (4876 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@Cloud_imperium: I was under the impression its only a flop if it has an official, voted on hype and doesn't meet it. There was no hype voted on for TLOUR so its not a flop

Yes there is. Goolge system wars TLOY hype thread, and most votes where AAA

#122 Edited by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@deadline-zero0: is that the original or the remastered? If its being reviewed and scored again, it would need another hype thread.

#123 Posted by StrifeDelivery (1754 posts) -

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

#124 Posted by elkoldo (1464 posts) -
@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@elkoldo said:

Another 8.lol at gamespot because of their ridiculous persistence in their wrongful judgement.It seems like they'll never have the guts to face the fact that they mistreated the game last year.

Even this time the new reviewer hasn't highlighted any weak points in the game (MacShea had at least made a few stupid statements to this effect) but still rated it 8 again.They just don't have the guts to accept their mistake.Carolyn virtually hasn't mentioned any weakness in the game , but preferred to stick with Tom's 8.How lol'able.

1.) Opinions can't be wrong.

2.) LOL what? Mistreated? This isn't a child. It's just videogames and opinions.

  1. In my opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.Still think opinions can't be wrong ?
  2. Yes.That's ill-treating !

#125 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

...Oh lord

#126 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@elkoldo said:

Another 8.lol at gamespot because of their ridiculous persistence in their wrongful judgement.It seems like they'll never have the guts to face the fact that they mistreated the game last year.

Even this time the new reviewer hasn't highlighted any weak points in the game (MacShea had at least made a few stupid statements to this effect) but still rated it 8 again.They just don't have the guts to accept their mistake.Carolyn virtually hasn't mentioned any weakness in the game , but preferred to stick with Tom's 8.How lol'able.

1.) Opinions can't be wrong.

2.) LOL what? Mistreated? This isn't a child. It's just videogames and opinions.

  1. In my opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.Still think opinions can't be wrong ?
  2. Yes.That's ill-treating !

Yes, they mistreated an inanimate object by saying it's a great game

#128 Posted by Snugenz (12768 posts) -
@elkoldo said:
@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@elkoldo said:

Another 8.lol at gamespot because of their ridiculous persistence in their wrongful judgement.It seems like they'll never have the guts to face the fact that they mistreated the game last year.

Even this time the new reviewer hasn't highlighted any weak points in the game (MacShea had at least made a few stupid statements to this effect) but still rated it 8 again.They just don't have the guts to accept their mistake.Carolyn virtually hasn't mentioned any weakness in the game , but preferred to stick with Tom's 8.How lol'able.

1.) Opinions can't be wrong.

2.) LOL what? Mistreated? This isn't a child. It's just videogames and opinions.

  1. In my opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.Still think opinions can't be wrong ?
  2. Yes.That's ill-treating !

Your example is a misconception, it's an opinion based on something factual. Someone's opinion on something subjective (how they feel about the game) cannot be wrong.

#129 Posted by elkoldo (1464 posts) -
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

#130 Edited by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

Not to mention that Joel first views Ellie as a job and then as his daughter, so why wouldn't he protect her. Was he really supposed to just let the people kill them. And Ellie does a fair amount of killing herself, is she not able to love either?

#131 Posted by StrifeDelivery (1754 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

#132 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery said:

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh

#133 Posted by DEadliNE-Zero0 (4876 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@deadline-zero0: is that the original or the remastered? If its being reviewed and scored again, it would need another hype thread.

But he was refering to original flopping. And it's still basically the same game. I don't like to think of it as one, but, by SW rules, TLOU did flop and fail to met the hype.

Honestly, i personally don't think the remaster needed a review at all. Probably GS wanting clicks. This was an easy one anyway. :P

#134 Posted by Caseytappy (2173 posts) -

Cross generation releases and remastering last gen games, I want a good reason to buy a PS4 but am not seeing it yet .

#135 Edited by StrifeDelivery (1754 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@StrifeDelivery said:

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh

That is during the 20 year time period from when the outbreak occurs to the present day (old Joel). I was referring to when he got the call right before the outbreak, when he was walking around his living room on the phone. He says he has some jobs lined up; to me, I believed him to be a contractor of some sorts, not some sketchy hitman or body disposal man as McShea wanted us to believe.

#136 Posted by AmazonAngry (968 posts) -

@lostrib: I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh)

If you're talking about after society collapsed, then yes.

McShea came to the conclusion, in the beginning of the game when Joel came home to his daughter late at night, that he had been out doing shady work...when you clearly heard him on the phone talking to his brother about construction.

Only a McShea would come to such a knuckle headed conclusion.

#137 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery said:

@lostrib said:

@StrifeDelivery said:

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh

That is during the 20 year time period from when the outbreak occurs to the present day (old Joel). I was referring to when he got the call right before the outbreak, when he was walking around his living room on the phone. He says he has some jobs lined up; to me, I believed him to be a contractor of some sorts, not some sketchy hitman or body disposal man as McShea wanted us to believe.

Yeah, he works construction

"Joel worked in construction, possibly as a carpenter. In the prologue, during a phone conversation with Tommy, he mentions desperately needing to keep his job with a contractor" (from TLOU wiki)

#138 Edited by elkoldo (1464 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@StrifeDelivery said:

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh

If I'm not wrong ,you mean the bit when he and Ellie encountered the ambush and the car accident that followed.Joel tells Ellie he was aware of the ambush because he'd been on both sides (survives and hunters) But he never tells anything about his job before the apocalypse.Actually Sarah is thing (person ?! ) before the plague that he ever speaks of.

#139 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@elkoldo said:
@lostrib said:

@StrifeDelivery said:

@elkoldo said:
@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

No she (Carolyn ,the reviewer) just forgot that the hunters would tear Ellie and Joel apart for their clothes and boots (remember that moment when hunters on the jeep shot that woman who was trying to run away ,only to get her boots ?) or the cannibals would eat them for dinner ! And hence ,she thinks Joel doesn't have enough reason to kill them.

I can't believe how haters defend Carolyn and her review.

In the original TLOU review, didn't McShea believe that Joel was doing shady work before the apocalypse occurred, simply because he said he had some jobs lined up? Now, we have Carolyn who believes that if you kill people in order to save someone, or in general to protect them, that that is not compatible. I guess we have to exclude a good number of action games and movies now because the main character goes through the movements to save someone near the end?

I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh

If I'm not wrong ,you mean the bit when he and Ellie encountered the ambush and the car accident that followed.Joel tells Ellie he was aware of the ambush because he'd been on both sides (survives and hunters) But he never tells anything about his job before the apocalypse.Actually Sarah is thing (person ?! ) before the plague that he ever speaks of.

Yeah, i missed that Strife was talking about before the outbreak

#140 Edited by mems_1224 (48424 posts) -

@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@tormentos said:
@freedomfreak said:

Aaah, memories..

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Zelda ALBW was GOTY

LMFAO owned. What a moron.

#141 Posted by lostrib (42227 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@tormentos said:
@freedomfreak said:

Aaah, memories..

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Zelda ALBW was GOTY

LMFAO owned. What a moron.

Lol

#142 Posted by SecretPolice (23378 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@tormentos said:
@freedomfreak said:

Aaah, memories..

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Zelda ALBW was GOTY

LMFAO owned. What a moron.

That gif, funny stuff. :)

#143 Edited by Alcapello (1309 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

@sHaDyCuBe321 said:

@tormentos said:
@freedomfreak said:

Aaah, memories..

Considering how gamespot owned them self naming it Goty i say my post was more than right..hahaha

Zelda ALBW was GOTY

LMFAO owned. What a moron.

Coincidence

#144 Posted by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery: not a saint but killing would wear on most people. Not like soldiers get PTSD from it or anything. Her opinion has merit, but entertainment requires some imagining of fantasy.

#145 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3804 posts) -

@amazonangry said:

@lostrib: I believe Joel actually admits to doing shady work at some point, similar to the hunters they run into in Pittsburgh)

If you're talking about after society collapsed, then yes.

McShea came to the conclusion, in the beginning of the game when Joel came home to his daughter late at night, that he had been out doing shady work...when you clearly heard him on the phone talking to his brother about construction.

Only a McShea would come to such a knuckle headed conclusion.

That's the issue I have with Tom and Carolyn. They preach so hard on sexuality and gender equality in gaming and then turn around and make other wild and uneducated accusations themselves.

Speaking of wild accusations, I would bet that if it weren't for one emotional moment in the Left Behind DLC, Gamespot would have scored it an 8 or below. It's almost as if that moment was written for some of the Gamespot staff.

#146 Posted by Gue1 (11267 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

perfect example about an opinion that is wrong. And they get paid to write this kind of nonsense.

And talking about nonsense... DF said there were no improvements on the shadows of TLOU when running at 30 frames. It seems they are even more uninformed than the average joe considering that the improved shadows were coming in a patch during the game's release date.

Gaming media/journalism is a joke.

#147 Posted by cainetao11 (19296 posts) -

@elkoldo: 1.In my opinion the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.Still think opinions can't be wrong ?

That's not your opinion, and its not a subjective topic. Entertainment by its very name is subjective. Everything doesn't entertain everyone. You know very well where the sun rises and sets hence you can say its wrong for your example.

#148 Edited by Zassimick (7082 posts) -

@StrifeDelivery said:

Regardless of the score given, I skimmed through the review and found this paragraph. Sometimes I just don't understand reviewers...

"Still, if you think too carefully about the importance the story places on the connection between these two characters, things start to fall apart a bit. Because The Last of Us is an action game that adheres to the established template of the genre, over the course of your journey you murder not just one or five or 12 people, but dozens and dozens of them, and it's questionable whether a man who treats the lives of so many of his fellow human beings as so disposable would really be capable of placing any meaningful importance on the life of one particular individual. You can't soil your hands with the blood of hundreds and still have room for love in your heart."

I guess in order to save someone, or care for another individual, you have to be a saint?

Never mind that the reason... you know what? It's not worth the time. Oh, how wrong it is.

#149 Edited by yixingtpot (1420 posts) -

I gave my PS3 copy to my nephew and planned on getting this new upscale version, but I'll wait for it to hit the $20 bin. It's the same game upscaled, smoothed graphics same dull textures=rip off double dipping BS once again just like on PS3 upscale rip offs. It's a great game, but this upscale version deserves about a 6/10 rating.

#150 Posted by StrifeDelivery (1754 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@StrifeDelivery: not a saint but killing would wear on most people. Not like soldiers get PTSD from it or anything. Her opinion has merit, but entertainment requires some imagining of fantasy.

Ok... I feel you're on a different track here. She doesn't say that the killing wore down Joel, that it could have adverse effects on him. No, all she says is that since he has killed a lot of people (regardless of his reasoning, which makes realistic sense), he is incapable of caring for and protecting someone else. I'm sorry, but her opinion does not have merit.