@kouji03 In what universe is an 8/10 a low score? And I never said you needed innovation to be "good". My point, which you missed entirely, was that when you get to scores like 9s or 10s I believe, as I think most journalists believe, that the game shouldn't be just recycled parts from other games. If you start giving 9s and 10s for games that do literally NOTHING new it defeats the entire idea, and diminshes what a truly high score means. IGN gave this game a 10. A game that has obvious, but not terribly serious, flaws. A game that is not original in any significant way is considered a "masterpiece". I wholeheartedly disagree with that. And since you haven't played it, and I have, maybe don't comment on on what this game offered that was new.
Someone who loves this game or think this review is too low please tell me how this game, in any way, innovates? What is in this game that we've never seen before? It seems to me to be unoriginal in almost every way. This is a zombie game. Zombies are all the rage these days so if your going to make a zombie game you better stand out in a few ways. To me, this is a 3rd person stealth action game with zombies. It looks great, plays okay, but doesn't add anything whatsoever to the genre. There are superficial RPG elements like crafting and improving your skills/abilities/equipment but they seem like they're just enough so the devs can say they put it in the game. Contextual fistfights! Push triangle! Nothing new. IMHO you don't get a 9 or 10 unless you add something new to the mix. Not once have I said "Wow. That was amazing. I've never seen that before. Wow." Someone please enlighten me if I'm wrong.
I'm several hours in and I have to say I totally agree that this game is widely over-hyped and overrated. I personally think an 8.0 is generous. The combat is seriously flawed. My companions have been "dragged" right in front of enemies as they follow me and don't alert the enemy. The constant save points are necessary due to the unforgiving combat. Joel is a world class MMA fighter apparently but the instant a clicker is within arms reach of you INSTANT DEATH. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for unforgiving combat and stealth. For you MGS4 fans I completed the game with a FOXHOUND rating. But this just feels off. Honestly, I liked the game better in 2003 when it was called Manhunt. They watched some Walking Dead, then added some Uncharted, a sprinkle of Dead Space, some (obligatory) crafting, and changed some human enemies to zombies. Voila, "The Last of Us". It looks great, no doubt, and its far from bad, but I just don't see the brilliance everyone is gushing about.
@WTA2k5 Most are agreeing with the MOH team because it seems to be a much more popular viewpoint. EA, of all publishers, isn't going to extract all the "fun" out of a game so that they can "make a more impactful statement." Sorry but there aren't enough emo kids and artistic purists out there to sustain that genre of game. While unfortunate, I believe you must lower your expectations.
Tom McShea is a clown and he should be fired immediately. His constant harping on the regenerating health is incredibly annoying and is simply his opinion, one that he doesn't seem to share with many gamers. For those who don't care for that the "hardcore" mode referenced in the video seems to address criticism yet he completely ignores it. His obsession with arguing against the developers' claim of authenticity borders on childish. To be so harsh on a game based on a tiny slice of the entire product is, in my opinion, irresponsible, unprofessional, and reckless. It's funny to watch his futile efforts to defend himself. BTW, I didn't play the most recent MOH, and probably won't play this one, but I found myself almost offended by this tool. For the life of me I can't figure out why he has appointed himself the defender of the word "authenticity". I'll be dismissing anything this guy writes in the future.
Sheepdog1744's comments