@gdc10 Why compare DotA?? DotA's gameplay is based on an old mod map for Warcraft III from about 2003 that has been refined to near perfection. It's doesn't have the story telling and cinematics you see in TLOU. It features in esport competitions around the world because the gameplay is so deep and engrossing not to mention fun to watch. That's why it got a 9. Still, this review sucks while TLOU rocks.
Wth Tom 9.5/10! There are a number of things that work against it. As Tom puts it it's pretty accurate; supporting characters are rarely sympathetic and combat contains too many immersion-breaking exploits.But one of the most impressive parts of the game is the engine itself; it should have gotten the technical graphics and animation emblems yet those two aspects didn't even get mentioned in the "The Good". And "Ellie is immediately likable and exhibits poignant growth" cmon man, that's a pretty subjective thing to put in a professional review. I know a lot of people that thought otherwise. Also "Crafting system demands environmental investigation" I'd say is actually more of a bad thing in this game. I know it's a survival game but after a couple of hours, the game rewards you too well for searching every single corner that it feels more like a chore. To me this game's strongest points are its cinematic story telling and the tense and well paced writing. To not even mention that in the summary is just poor. A lot of Gamespot reviews are too much creative writing of the reviewer's own experience and hence they are too bent on writing exciting narratives rather than professional and objective reviews. "aesthetics are predominately ho-hum" ?? Get your s*** together Tom. You have completely missed out on the most brilliant aspects of the game.
@zimerust105 @Blade_Runner22 Naughty Dog has already shown Uncharted has much better gameplay than this game, but this isn't Uncharted, its THE LAST OF US!!!
They should go back to the old days of climbing big, majestic buildings, not swimming underwater and wrestling with eels. Combat is getting worse; he's OP even with fists. OP!
@TheGamerPhenom @Firzenzo : S Kinda did misread that there and I agree with you. I'm not a fan of all the numbered titles coming out these last few years because they are more or less the same yet they still sell massively. But I was trying to point out that there are games like LoL and HoN with online micro-transaction that sort of get away with being 'monthly' releases without actually being called full fledged sequels (been developed over a release time of about 5 years now). With the small content releases, they can make lots of money for a little bit of work. That's a business model that's pretty ideal AND it keeps value in the name of the game (pretty perfect model). While consoles can put out DLC, there is always a limit to how much DLCs you can make before people lose interest so all your left with is to release new titles either in old (AC) or new IP (Watchdogs is what you want?). In terms of innovation, ACIII tried for a new combat system which looked great in trailers but turned out to be more shallow than the previous one and also their idea of the open world frontier with hunting was also a flop, especially with RDR doing the same thing halfway through the release of ACIII. ACIII makes a mockery of trilogies by being so bad with all its crappy gameplay and bugs. That is partly a result of the way they tried to completely reinvent the game (and 3 years development is pretty good time for a fresh idea). Luckily for them, they still have enough cash to stay in the game. I give credit to Bethesda for making their games unique and under different names they probably have a more creative team when it comes to innovation. They do the 'smart' thing which is holding onto a great idea properly crafting it, preferring to release quality over quantity. However, I think Bethesda is also a company quite confident in their talents so feel no pressure to release titles so frequently and plus they probably don't care as much about money now. Bethesda still got some long time fans from the 90s so are the better experienced company if you are comparing to the AC team. AC team got a lot of hot competition in the open world action adventure genre so might feel a lot of pressure both to innovate and to release to grab those new fans. I guess when you become bent on business models, you don't care as much about the value in the name of your IPSs (products). Just take a look at how fast newer models of phones are being released it's getting quicker too. Samsung Galaxy III, I-Phone 5, Assassin's Creed IV, what's the difference? Business models are killing the franchises with their release of half assed games but still they're making boatloads of money. Bah sorry I'm kinda writing all over but I'm sure the same thing is happening in the movies industry; lots of sequels. But the I guess the point is, that there's no point for the old fans anymore, Ubisoft's sold their soul. So no point in b****ing.
Firzenzo's comments