The GOTG The Last of Us 2 to have complex morality

ND and masterful storytelling?

@pc_rocks: Laugh now, you'll be sorry once the goty awards start raining in ;).

Amazing -- the amount of confident speculation itt.

Gaming awards are the equivalent of Tobey Maguire's MTV best on screen-kiss accolade. Run by mentalist "how does I play games?" leftys and Geoff Knightley snorting cheesy puffs of a hookers ass as he desperately cushions the pain.

When 4chan and reddit have more credibility, you know it's gone to shit.

@uninspiredcup: Geoff snorting cheese puffs off a hookers ass. Absolutely poetic lol.

Admittedly it begins slow but gets better if you can stick out the beginning (once you meet Bill things ratchet up quickly), so I'd give it another good faith effort. If it still hasn't grabbed you after Bill's section, then I can't much blame you, perhaps it's just not for you. I personally love the beginning of the game; the slower pace allows for tonal establishment of the world and building of the characters and their motivations before thrusting them into heavier action.

But if you're playing TLoU and viewing and fighting the narrative as a burden to get to what you view as the meat of the game, that's like drinking coffee and bitching about the cream. It's like people come on here laughably propping up shit like DMC, unable to see how asinine such a comparison really is. Narrative is the point in TLoU. Accept it or reject it. But again, if you even begin viewing it as an impediment.....don't even bother.

@MirkoS77: That’s exactly when I stopped playing. When I met Bill.

@MirkoS77:

Nah i can get down with those types of games. I tried going at it twice so maybe it was a time and place thing or i was pre occupied with other things. Its rare where ill invest a ton of time into a game(BotW being a rare exception), and tbh i dont play many games period.

Looking forward to this game. Played the first one many times. I like when there is a balance of action and story segments. You can’t drop me into a game like breath of the wild or Minecraft and expect me to stick with it for long. Without a goal or reason for me to do something I won’t do it.

Yeah I don't know. If I ever find myself having to force myself to play a game thinking I'll eventually enjoy it, I immediately stop. I don't force games, I drop them at the moment I feel apathy or obligation. Maybe I'll try to see it through if there's some mechanic I adore, but rarely. Sounds to me like TLoU isn't for you, and if your time is tight, then maybe move on.

@MirkoS77:

Yeah im the same way with any media. I did like the Uncharted series. This game though, you aint the only one; one of my friends insists on it, says its his favorite game ever.

@MirkoS77: might be nice if you tried some reading comprehension with that take slick, and actually read the posts that were propping up DMC.

I didn’t come on berating TLOU with a DMC comparison, someone else brought it up because it is a game I like. With the off hand “but mah emotional depth” to which I promptly felt like highlighting that narrative is not some end all be all to the medium. I have no real beef with TLOU as a game.

Beyond that your take is short sighted from a critical standpoint. A game’s direction isn’t beyond reproach, considering no one would think twice to dog DMCs story, even when it’s openly cheesy.

Dynasty Warriors is exactly what those devs intend it to be. Doesn’t make it less shit because it accomplishes it’s goals. Likewise a story driven game doesn’t get a license to be shallow because it’s story driven.

Like I said if you appreciate the superficial elements of games like these mazal tov, me personally I like my games to have depth and be rewarding for people to want to get better at the game.

I was hyped for this game till they unveiled it and I discovered they were far more interested in telling us all about Ellie's sexual preferences than actually showcasing a game.

It looks like a 'with it' soap opera with occasional shooting sequences, desperate to show how modern and inclusive they are wearing it like a badge it's kind of cringeworthy actually.

Maybe there's a game in there somewhere if you can get past the 'message' to find it. And yeah I know it's too early to call I'm just saying first impressions based on what they've shown us are less than encouraging, for me anyway.

@blueinheaven: pretty much agree, but ND are competent enough developers to overlook what they’re obviously shoehorning in. If it plays as well as the first (and from what they showed in the trailer it looks to be), I’m game.

Agreed and its becoming a ND staple.

I think I may be the in between of @jg4xchamp and you.. I differ from champ in terms of the Witcher games. I loved 2&3. But I agree with him in that I love gameplay and I want it to be what gets people talking about a game as much if not more than say TLOU ending. I talk enough with friends about great novels, films and their characters. What separates Video Games is GAMEPLAY

Shouldn't they be top for story telling in a game? GOTY should put its onus on what makes it a game: GAMEPLAY.

@cainetao11: I think Witcher’s presentation stuff is great, the writing n story telling is kino as ****. The playing it part could be a lot a lot a lot better. Doesn’t help that games cause that for me that it has melee combat, and I’m a fiend for melee centric action games n fighting games ;p

@davillain-: I would chose Cyberpunk over The Last of Us any day of the week. Just sayin'.

I understand and accept that no one piece of entertainment will ever please every person.

I played the first in 2014 so it was tough to push through at times but I did. I had played the second on 360 but played it again on PC with the carry over save file from one. Then did the same for my first play through of 3. Ive read a few of the books. Im into it and had no trouble enjoying 2&3. But different strokes and all that dude.

It has options, well durr, you have the option to watch it at the cinema, youtube, or most expensively on the PS4.

@cainetao11: TLOU took a lot of goty awards for being a great game across the board. It wasn't deep in terms of gameplay but it did its job. This has been the case with many goty winners (GoW, witcher, RDR2, etc.)

1. Awards n reviews are still a glorified opinion, not an objective measure of quality. Did you know Citizen Kane lost the year it was up for an academy award? Google the movie that beat it, and tell me with a straight face you heard of that movie, because you've at least have heard the name "Citizen Kane" in passing. One is a land mark film, the other is just any other film.

2. This mediums critics are garbage. Not one video game review from a publication can anyone honestly argue for having good description for the gameplay of the game they are reviewing. Which is pretty absurd whether if you wanted a critique or a buyer's guide that they are so incapable of explaining the basics with any sort of detail.

This is the only medium whose critics ignore depth in favor of mass market appeal to loft praise at. That is not the case with film critics, tv critics, music critics, what have you, and they have a more academic framework for what works for criticism and what doesn't. And they misfire come award season as well, difference is at least they have a tangible standard from the mass market joe shmoes.

Award season is a shmuck fest, gamey games have always been getting stiffed come award season because as stated, this medium a certain contingent of its community that suffers from ugly step child syndrome.

Mechanics are not the end all be all either. The old Indiana Jones pixel hunt games can be just as enjoyable as DMC or SMG, just depends who you ask.

A game's direction isn't beyond reproach in critique, but it should be measured in the context of its goals and not contrasted against something else that is going for something entirely different. A story driven game doesn't need a "license" to be shallow, because it's, y'know.....STORY driven? Who are you to say that a game that forgoes mechanics for something else is shallow? That's like saying a type of music isn't really music or lesser music because it lacks guitar riff in it. People arbitrarily pulling mechanics out of their ass as some end all be all determinant to leverage in derision of games that don't suit their particular preference is asinine and myopic.

I don't give a shit if it's Dragon's Lair in the arcade or DMC at home. A game's a game. Nintendo's games, heavily mechanically based, are awesome while playing, but they're utterly forgettable afterwards. With games like TLoU I don't forget, even though it's supposedly "shallower".

All a matter of priorities, slick.

I'm really hype to play Cyberpunk 2077 then TLOU2. I'll buy TLOU2 day one but it's not on my hype radar.

@jg4xchamp: I mostly agree with you. I'm bringing awards up for jokes to tease TLOU haters :P.

I disagree that film critics are better, there are many cases (2001 a space odyssey, stay, alita, etc.) where they were flat out laughable. I have absolutely no faith in the Oscars, it's way too political to be a reliable award show imo.

I'm certain TLOU2 will get many awards though, and this is irrespective of me loving naughty dog's games. Critics seem to be infatuated with this kind of game atm.

Because gaming is not a passive entertainment medium like movies or books. Gameplay and player engagement is what sets this medium apart just like movies need to have acting, cinematography, direction to set it apart from books. Imitating another medium should never be rewarded. That's like saying a movie which does nothing but display pages of book on cinema screen should get a pass because it's imitating a book. Such sh*t will never fly in a movie industry.

Quite funny you say TLOU is memorable. TLOU and 'games' of its ilk are forgotten once you're done with it never to be touched again and most people that enjoy these move on to the next flavor of the month. The best you ever hear of them is probably at that year's awards while games with good mechanics are still being played to this day after decades have passed.

So, if she kissed a guy would you be bitching so much? Do you complain when games have straight couples making out? Did you raise objection to Geralt's sexual interaction in The Witcher 3 because they were more interested in telling about his sexual preference? Did you complain that Drake kissing his wife Uncharted 4 was too focused on showing straight couples and the overall game was just a movie with occasional shooting sequences?

It seems like every time a game includes anyone outside the straight white male its shoehorning, forced, pushing an agenda, it has to make sense with the story and all sort of additional nonsense.

TLOU2

PS6 2024 launch title

@Pedro: This is how I feel about this too. People are bypassing an entire game based off one kiss. It was definitely a statement, but the fact that many people are enraged about it proves its point.

If y'all argued that kissing shouldn't be at E3 because kids might be watching then that's one thing (although I would disagree with that too). Instead, the principal focus seems to be on the two girls.

@MirkoS77: sure they are, they are the defining characteristic of this medium. A book wouldn’t be absolved of criticism for bad writing, a film believe it or not is judged on its cinematography as anything else, and yeah any sort of critical look at a game shouldn’t be giving a free pass over on the mechanics of a game.

This isn’t a passive medium but an interactive one and having mindless interactions is a net negative, not a positive. You may find deep games forgettable, but in the same context someone naturally into games is going to find last of us forgettable. A glorified one n done that you move on from. Especially if you are reasonably well versed with the story telling of other mediums.

The gameplay on the other hand no other format provides, and if that’s shallow, the game is shallow no matter what story it tells. It is what it is.

Using your music analogy, you don’t get to be lyrically proficient in hip hop, but have atrocious beats. Because at the end of the day, that’s the music and a significant part of it. I’m not saying games like last of us are shallow because it lacks combos n jump cancels.

It’s shallower relative to deeper games because it has binary stealth with simple one button take downs, third person cover shooting where the only real thing the player has to worry about is a rng element that makes you miss because yolo. Those are actually reasonable criticisms to be made against naughty dogs gameplay. Because I can do far better for stealth, survival horror, or third person shooting.

Their hybrid is just typical jack of all trades syndrome.

Beyond that I believe haven’t said it’s not a difference of perspectives, and it’s totally fine for people to like story joints more. I believe I didn’t bring up DMC, but someone else did as some cheap gotcha thing because when in doubt, let’s downplay the game the person I’m speaking to to make a point that is nonexistent.

You story goons just have a hard time dealing with a criticism, especially because I don’t even think I called last of us shallow, it’s shallower, but it gets plenty of situational depth at least of its encounter designs.

Beyond that, if thinking games should be held to a critical standard for gameplay is too old fashioned n radical, get the **** off my lawn.

@Pedro: @XVision84: 2001 is a fantastic film, you’re a slob.

I love how “video games art art” “artists shouldn’t be restricted” until its “too political”.

?‍♀️

@jg4xchamp: 2001 is a fantastic film, that's my point. The original reception for 2001 was awful and it did poorly. The critics were way off.

Artists should not be restricted and are free to use their political beliefs in their work. However, an awards show shouldn't do that imo. Let each film have its voice. From my observations, the Oscar's have long since awarded films that fit Hollywood's political agenda rather than based on a film's own merits.

@XVision84: and i said those goons misfire plenty and they actually value depth in their medium. Gamings critics are a billion times more stupid and incompetent at games.

Other wise sure award shows n awards themselves are bullshit.

@jg4xchamp: I know what you said. I'm agreeing with you, you old fart :P. Except that film critics are just as bad as game critics at times imo.

All the depth in movies like 2001 seemed to go over their heads when it first released, so I wouldn't necessarily say they value depth (at least not all the time).

@XVision84: that’s better than none of the time

@jg4xchamp: Is there an independent game reviewer that you trust? There's got to be at least 1 lol.

@XVision84: Gaming can benefit from more objective reviews. As it stands it's mostly fanboys and corporate shills.

@XVision84: well GOTY awards mean jack & shit to me. I don’t get to hold the award or receive a pay raise or bonus from it nor does it make me enjoy a game more or less.

@cainetao11: I don't get anything personally from it either. I'm just happy to see people who work hard get rewarded for their efforts. Especially if it's for a game I enjoyed too.

@Pedro: Agreed but I think that's only going to happen for certain independent reviewers.

Talk about missing the point in spectacular fashion. I don't care who Ellie does or doesn't kiss what I care about is waiting for details on one of the most eagerly awaited sequels of all time and then getting a long trailer that spends its ENTIRE runtime making it clear Ellie is a lesbian and that's what this game is all about.

Witcher 3 and Uncharted never launched selling themselves on the sexual preferences of the main characters that is not the focal point of these games.

I'll wait for reviews. If the gameplay is the focus and is as solid as the last one nobody will be happier than me. I simply gave my impressions of what they presented us with as the focus of the title and you seem to have gone and got yourself all upset.

Whatever.

@XVision84: no. YouTube cats like Joseph Anderson are pretty good, if way too drawn out with his vids. I like Chris Wagar, but his stuff is more of a blog.

Any sort of written reviews that gets on metacritic tho? All trash. Not bad, trash. Literally fucking useless.

@XVision84: “negative messages will result in an immediate ban”

What kind of discussion is this where everyone has to be on the same side?

Anyway, I think The Last of Us had a great ending and a sequel was not really needed. Maybe have other characters in the same The Last of Us world, but not the same main characters as the first.

@ButDuuude: It's a joke, at least until I am given mod powers. That should never happen, for the sake of everyone on this site. It'd be like giving a monkey an AK-47 ?

Few decisions would be so immediately regretted.

At what point do you quantify mechanical depth in justification of qualifying something a game?

You're arbitrarily pulling out of thin air your mechanical qualifiers in determination of what you prefer in defining this medium. Again, I don't care if it's Dragon's Lair or DMC. Gaming's defined by the sole metric of player agency that falls along a wide spectrum. Gaming's evolved, just like how movies were once black and white and silent, and when they finally included music, sound, and color, rest assured there were traditionalists who protested, just as you are, that their precious medium was being perverted by another that had no place in a strictly visual medium.

I'm very happy times change and differing mediums borrow from one another. While I admire their talent in it and believe it absolutely has a place in the industry, truth be told I'd be bored to shit of this industry if Nintendo's strict mechanics-based philosophy were the only one, and am grateful to Sony in the more narrative-focused, cinematic-based approach they've embraced. There's obviously a massive market for it.

TLoU's very memorable, far more memorable than predominantly player agency heavy games which have me twitching my fingers constantly. I don't find such games objectively 'better' simply because they adhere more to the medium's distinguishing characteristic. Aside, TLoU, mechanically, excels. The combat system in it could easily stand on its own, it's brilliant, due to a efficient crafting system that necessitates strategic consideration of resource management in dynamically evolving encounters. The game's exhilarating at its best moments. A competently executed, albeit admittedly unoriginal, narrative is simply icing on the cake.

At what point would you recognize something as pushing an agenda, or does that not apply as long as the evil straight white male is being marginalized? I welcome diversity, but I'm curious as to where you draw the distinction in acknowledging an agenda in striving to achieve it?

Books, movies, and games are all critiqued on various fronts. There's not one aspect that is more predominantly expected of it in qualifying its nature. As long as movies maintain that qualifier, it's a movie, and it's no better nor less than any other. Same with a game. You guys seem to only recognize depth in gaming predicated upon mechanical complexity which I find an odd position to take.

Sure, games can be shallower in mechanics, but they can also retain their depth even so. Mechanical complexity says absolutely nothing on whether or not it's a game, how good it is, or how deep it is. I've played many games that are far mechanically shallower which I would consider much more in-depth than finger twitch fests. Many RTSes and turn-based strategy games, for example, are extremely simplistic in their interfaces, yet they afford tremendous depth of gameplay.

Your strawman would have merit, if I was arguing to not look at any other element. That's not the case, I am however valuing one element far more, because at the end of the day it is the art form.

Depth isn't exclusively on complexity, you can be complex and not necessarily deep. DMC isn't just deep because it's execution barrier, it's deep because its different components have synergy with each other and allows for meaningful micro decisions in combat. The fact that you look at them as "finger twitch fests' says way more about your ignorance of the games you're arguing against.

RTS games are some of the more complex games period, Starcraft by its nature is big time on APM, and has tons of different units, build routes, terrain, matchup shifts that the player has to account for, so not exactly a genre anyone would use to argue for simpler. 2D Platformers have simple mechanics, but they leverage their depth from the challenges presented and the flexibility of the characters jump arc n acceleration. So no considering the TPS examples I would use for depth aren't exclusively Vanquish but also things like Resident Evil 4, you're kind of missing me with that shit.

You can be a game and not be mechanically deep. You can be a shallow game, just like you can be a badly written book. But since you didn't get the point: you can not be subpar at the defining characteristic of the art form and be absolved of any criticism for it.

Considering your counterpoints keep requiring me to say something I haven't actually said, is the part that bothers you that people are dunking on The Last of Us for not being nothing exceptional gameplay wise or because the name Devil May Cry was stated, and you clearly don't know shit about shit when it comes to DMC?

Because the latter is not champ's fault, that's your mans XVisions, take it up with him.

I take it back lol, imagine being this much of a fucking putz.

I've got to admit I'm intrigued that you find RTS games complex in any way. C&C, Age of Empires, Starcraft, etc, they can all be won very easily very quickly no matter what the current mission or goal is.

Build fast, explore fast, grab resources, build army, attack. End.

Of course you can take your time and ponder all your options which just gives the other faction more time to build its forces (pesky AI) and then the game becomes more difficult but you're just creating your own artificial difficulty by doing so.

The ingame difficulty options can make the game harder but seriously just by exploring the game mechanics and thinking about it all you are buying into complexity that just isn't there by dithering instead of 'doing'.

There is no hidden complexity in these games they just appear to be complex and in fact if you actually want to succeed deep strategy is actively discouraged by the actual game mechanics.