Why everyone ignores the issues in TLOU?

  • 135 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#51 Posted by Pikminmaniac (11238 posts) -

@PurpleMan5000: Yeah I agree with that. Most reviewers aren't actually reviewing the whole game the way movie critics or book critics must review the entire work of art they critique. Personally, it takes me a very long time of playing a game, and looking back at it and playing it again to give a true assessment of my feelings for it.

Then there are games like fighters which really cannot be reviewed until the community gets their hands on them and tinkers with the game's mechanics for at least a month.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#52 Posted by foxhound_fox (97096 posts) -

@jg4xchamp said:

Because videogame critics are soft.

I wish you would be a professional critic. Those reviews I'd read.

Avatar image for speedfreak48t5p
#53 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (12927 posts) -

@Heil68 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@Heil68 said:

Top 5 GOAT by the Naughty Gods.

Keep the HYPE going.

Praise the Sony Gods!

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#56 Posted by Pikminmaniac (11238 posts) -

@farrell2k said:
@Pikminmaniac said:

@farrell2k said:

I am still amazed that people weren't bored to tears over another "zombie apocalypse" game.

It's a lot more than that friend. The story doesn't focus that much on the infection compared to the people dealing with surviving a rough and desolate world.

Good to know. 10 minutes into it and I was bored to tears. Maybe one day I'll try it again.

Yeah most of the enemies end up being human which I thought was really nice.

Avatar image for TheEroica
#57 Edited by TheEroica (17522 posts) -

While I think TLOU deserves it's praise, the game is certainly not without flaw. I think reviewers get so enamored with making a profound statement about the emotional investment, characters and narrative in the game that they choose to overlook the gameplay flaws.... after all that would be the trendy thing to do right?

I think the 8 gamespot gave it is too low, but the game isn't a 10 either.

Avatar image for dave123321
#58 Edited by dave123321 (35357 posts) -

I don't think you can really use the remaster as a show of what naughty dog can do with the ps4 at this point. Given what ND has said they didn't really try to address the game mechanics so the ai stuff being the same shouldn't be that surprising. It seemed that the goal was to bring what the ps3 version was with an uptick in performance akin to using higher settings on a PC. Largely using much of what had been there already.

I am interested in seeing what Rockstar has done since the trailer for gta v for the PC and next gen did show more then just a purely visual and slight performance upgrade.

Avatar image for Heil68
#59 Posted by Heil68 (57960 posts) -

@TheEroica said:

While I think TLOU deserves it's praise, the game is certainly not without flaw. I think reviewers get so enamored with making a profound statement about the emotional investment, characters and narrative in the game that they choose to overlook the gameplay flaws.... after all that would be the trendy thing to do right?

I think the 8 gamespot gave it is too low, but the game isn't a 10 either.

yeah, certainly not perfect, I'd give it a 9.9 GOTY score,

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#60 Posted by LJS9502_basic (163227 posts) -

@dave123321: Correct dave...

Avatar image for speedfreak48t5p
#62 Edited by speedfreak48t5p (12927 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:

Why does Gue1 feel the need to be a turd in the punch bowl for cows? Next he'll be saying Xbox games are superior. pfff. That'l be the day ey?

Avatar image for miiiiv
#63 Edited by miiiiv (900 posts) -

That the AI remained the same is not very surprising but I honestly thought things like pop ins would be fixed/greatly improved (if they were a problem in the original, I haven't played it so I don't know) in the remastered version. It seems like a smarter thing to do than increasing the draw distance and better shadows as excessive pop ins are really noticeable and take away some of the immersion.
It's not a deal breaker by any means though and this is the only game so far that actually makes me want to buy a ps4.

Avatar image for Mr-Kutaragi
#64 Posted by Mr-Kutaragi (2466 posts) -

Because not major issue. No game is perfect, every game hav issue but they are judge as package and this is GOTG because everything is of high quality and nothing sacrifice- graphic, gameplay, control, story, music, multiplayer design. Not full next generation game, definite up port but well done.

Avatar image for lostrib
#65 Posted by lostrib (49999 posts) -

Actually, didn't McShea's original review note some things that break immersion? And he got shit on by this board.

I don't ignore the flaws in the game, but I found they didn't greatly decrease my overall enjoyment.

Avatar image for handssss
#66 Edited by handssss (1907 posts) -

@dave123321 said:

I don't think you can really use the remaster as a show of what naughty dog can do with the ps4 at this point. Given what ND has said they didn't really try to address the game mechanics so the ai stuff being the same shouldn't be that surprising. It seemed that the goal was to bring what the ps3 version was with an uptick in performance akin to using higher settings on a PC. Largely using much of what had been there already.

I am interested in seeing what Rockstar has done since the trailer for gta v for the PC and next gen did show more then just a purely visual and slight performance upgrade.

true, but it is damn impressive how good this game looks sometimes.

Avatar image for lostrib
#67 Edited by lostrib (49999 posts) -

@handssss said:

@dave123321 said:

I don't think you can really use the remaster as a show of what naughty dog can do with the ps4 at this point. Given what ND has said they didn't really try to address the game mechanics so the ai stuff being the same shouldn't be that surprising. It seemed that the goal was to bring what the ps3 version was with an uptick in performance akin to using higher settings on a PC. Largely using much of what had been there already.

I am interested in seeing what Rockstar has done since the trailer for gta v for the PC and next gen did show more then just a purely visual and slight performance upgrade.

true, but it is damn impressive how good this game looks sometimes.

Does Photo mode have a tilt-shift setting or something?

Avatar image for mems_1224
#68 Posted by mems_1224 (56917 posts) -

you're an awful cow. what happened to you?

Avatar image for SambaLele
#69 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

Probably they are not ignored, only that the game is great even with those flaws. Those are important issues, and in other games they would impact score more than they did, but from what everyone says (I wouldn't know myself because I've never played it), it's just that the quality provided in other aspects make up for it. This is a guess. What's your opinion on this, people are turning a blind eye on this? Reviewers turned a blind eye on these flaws?

Avatar image for sirkibble2
#70 Posted by sirkibble2 (942 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

So the question becomes do the flaws you mentioned break the immersion so bad that it does merit a lower score? You're thinking objectively. Reviews aren't written that way. They're written based on experience. And there's plenty of games we've all played that have a myriad of flaws but we don't care because our experience was great. Same principle.

Avatar image for Seabas989
#71 Posted by Seabas989 (13224 posts) -

@jg4xchamp said:

Because videogame critics are soft.

Avatar image for PurpleMan5000
#72 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (9586 posts) -

If the human AI is going to bumble around like an idiot, I would honestly rather the enemy AI just ignore them. That is a lot less annoying than having them give up my position so I have to reload for no reason whatsoever.

Avatar image for sirkibble2
#73 Posted by sirkibble2 (942 posts) -

@Bread_or_Decide: Game journalists have been doing this for a very long time. They're not excited about getting a game early anymore. It becomes normal pretty quickly.

Avatar image for SambaLele
#74 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@sirkibble2 said:

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

So the question becomes do the flaws you mentioned break the immersion so bad that it does merit a lower score? You're thinking objectively. Reviews aren't written that way. They're written based on experience. And there's plenty of games we've all played that have a myriad of flaws but we don't care because our experience was great. Same principle.

I'd defend the more objective approach. The objective approach can result in various very good/almost perfect or even perfect qualities making up to few bad points even if these are very, very bad. Objectively, a score doesn't start from a perfect 10 and suffers discounts. This the subjective method, coming from a perfect idea, the ideal game, we have in our heads. The objective one, builds an overall score from 0 to 10, ground up, out of other 0-10 scores awarded to separate aspects, judging each one according to how the game fares in comparison to other games in it's own context... that's one way to say that what's a 6/10 in AI to you doesn't change an 8/10 or 9/10 final score in the case of there being enough 9/10 or 10/10 things, since in those the game does better then other competing games or is unique in some way (graphics, sounds, story, etc.).

Avatar image for darkangel115
#75 Posted by darkangel115 (4449 posts) -

@dave123321 said:

The ai stuff has been part of many reviews

True but they ignore it. Some games like TLOU and Skyrim are full of glitches, pop ins, freezes etc and the reviewers don't count it against the games score, yet the same reviewers will take a game they don't like and use minor glitches as a way of justifying a lower score.

Avatar image for cainetao11
#76 Posted by cainetao11 (33915 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

I have said the AI thing since last July. Also the fact that Joel and Tess take the escort job in order to get their guns back. But through beginning of the game they could have picked up many guns of the people they killed. Terrible hole.

Avatar image for sirkibble2
#77 Posted by sirkibble2 (942 posts) -

@SambaLele said:

I'd defend the more objective approach. The objective approach can result in various very good/almost perfect or even perfect qualities making up to few bad points even if these are very, very bad. Objectively, a score doesn't start from a perfect 10 and suffers discounts. This the subjective method, coming from a perfect idea we have in our heads. The objective one, builds an overall score from 0 to 10, out of other 0-10 scores awarded to separate aspects, judging each one according to how the game fares in comparison to other games in it's own context... that's one way to say that what's a 6/10 in AI to you doesn't change an 8/10 or 9/10 if there are enough 9/10 or 10/10 things, since in those the game does better then other competing games or is unique in some way (graphics, sounds, story, etc.).

That's an interesting point. The problem I'm seeing is that in order to have an objective review, that means there has to be an absolute standard. As much as a person can build an objective score from 0/10 based on other micro scores, those micro scores are naturally subjective in nature because there's no over-arching standard to base the objectivity of something like AI on. That would make objective scores actually subjective.

And subjective scores aren't based from a "perfect" idea in our head because it's not impossible for a game to surpass what our idea of "perfection" is. It's based on experience. We have an idea of what our experience should be. When a game doesn't match that experience, that affects the score and obviously the written or verbal recommendation and analysis. If it exceeds our expected experience, obviously that bodes well in favor of the game. I think that's a more accurate representation of what you're saying concerning the subjective reasoning.

Avatar image for cainetao11
#78 Edited by cainetao11 (33915 posts) -
@joel_c17 said:

Fallout 3 got a 9 and it had more bugs than any other game in existence.

Earth defense force has more bugs

Avatar image for aroxx_ab
#79 Edited by aroxx_ab (13236 posts) -

Because not everyone double dipping this game, own Ps3 version is enough...dont know if you speak true or lying, nuff said

Avatar image for papatrop
#80 Posted by PapaTrop (1792 posts) -

Well, gaming journalism is a joke, so that's probably why.

Avatar image for Zelda187
#81 Posted by Zelda187 (1047 posts) -

What game doesn't have a few issues?

Who gives a shit. I'm a PC gamer and think it's hilarious to constantly see console gamers complain about textures, lighting and "jaggies" of all things.

LOL...get a PC

Avatar image for daious
#82 Edited by Daious (2315 posts) -

Seems like issues with hardware over the game.

Avatar image for megaspiderweb09
#83 Posted by megaspiderweb09 (3686 posts) -

Red dead redemption was one of the buggies, glitchest, inconsistent technical marvel I have ever loved from rockstar. Yes tc, you are not picking because you choose to, a product that offers satisfaction on a high scale is considered top grade, doesn't mean it's flawless, it just means those flaws are nit picking level and that is what you are doing tc

Avatar image for Couth_
#84 Posted by Couth_ (10369 posts) -

I hardly follow this game and I heard about the terrible AI many times.. no one ever ignored that

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#85 Edited by uninspiredcup (26365 posts) -

Many reviewers consider the gameplay to be terrible and not as good as Halflife 2.

The reason for not being brought up appears be be faith that you, the reader, instinctively know, know.

Avatar image for MonsieurX
#86 Edited by MonsieurX (37395 posts) -

I'd be curious to see any reviewer comparing it to HL2...links?

@uninspiredcup said:

Many reviewers consider the gameplay to be terrible and not as good as Halflife 2.

The reason for not being brought up appears be be faith that you, the reader, instinctively know, know.

Avatar image for leandrro
#87 Posted by leandrro (1644 posts) -

your answer:

Loading Video...

Avatar image for GreySeal9
#88 Posted by GreySeal9 (28247 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

@PurpleMan5000: Yeah I agree with that. Most reviewers aren't actually reviewing the whole game the way movie critics or book critics must review the entire work of art they critique.

That's not the impression I get from book and movie reviews. Actually, IMO, gaming reviews seem much more exhaustive.

Avatar image for AzatiS
#89 Posted by AzatiS (14462 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

Pop ins .... thats your problem and makes game not fun for you ? I mean seriously now ?

Avatar image for leandrro
#90 Posted by leandrro (1644 posts) -

@Cloud_imperium said:

Because game journalism isn't the same as it used to be , many years ago . Now it is full of corruption , casuals and fanboys . Remember how IGN criticized health pick ups in The New Order , because it was "ancient" .?

TLOU is great game , I enjoyed it alot . Story telling is pretty good , even though setting itself isn't original . Gameplay wise , it is nothing special , that's why no one praised its gameplay in any review . But it is good enough for an action game . Overall I'll rate it 8.5/10 . Definitely not a 10 game imo .

good game, score 7.5

oh wait. its a console exclusive?

then 9

oh wait! lots of ads on our site??!!

10 GOTY

Avatar image for leandrro
#91 Posted by leandrro (1644 posts) -

@amazonangry said:

you must be new here because those issues have been discussed quite extensively, yet in the end it's still the most awarded game of all time

yes, because awards make a OK game turn into GOTY

Avatar image for MonsieurX
#92 Posted by MonsieurX (37395 posts) -

@amazonangry said:

you must be new here because those issues have been discussed quite extensively, yet in the end it's still the most awarded game of all time

Doesn't mean much. Just much more media\websites now than it used to be.

Avatar image for AzatiS
#93 Edited by AzatiS (14462 posts) -
@Cloud_imperium said:

Because game journalism isn't the same as it used to be , many years ago . Now it is full of corruption , casuals and fanboys . Remember how IGN criticized health pick ups in The New Order , because it was "ancient" .?

TLOU is great game , I enjoyed it alot . Story telling is pretty good , even though setting itself isn't original . Gameplay wise , it is nothing special , that's why no one praised its gameplay in any review . But it is good enough for an action game . Overall I'll rate it 8.5/10 . Definitely not a 10 game imo .

And that sir ... is your opinion and by your logic and what i just read your opinion >>> Professional journalism ... well not really.

Avatar image for AzatiS
#94 Posted by AzatiS (14462 posts) -
@Heil68 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@Heil68 said:

Top 5 GOAT by the Naughty Gods.

Keep the HYPE going.

With that i think this topic ends

Avatar image for Kjranu
#95 Posted by Kjranu (1752 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

This game is not TLOU 2. Get over it.

Avatar image for vashkey
#96 Posted by vashkey (33782 posts) -

Probably the same reason the slew of flaws in Uncharted are ignored

Avatar image for handssss
#97 Posted by handssss (1907 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

I have said the AI thing since last July. Also the fact that Joel and Tess take the escort job in order to get their guns back. But through beginning of the game they could have picked up many guns of the people they killed. Terrible hole.

the fireflies at the end of the game all had military grade assault rifles. weapons like this are more than likely what joel and tess were doing the job for. Throughout the game, most enemies usually only had pistols and pipes and barely any ammunition to spare.

Avatar image for gago-gago
#98 Posted by gago-gago (12050 posts) -

It already flopped here so their fans are ignoring these failures as much as possible and pretending everything was ok.

Avatar image for cainetao11
#99 Edited by cainetao11 (33915 posts) -

@handssss said:

@cainetao11 said:

@Gue1 said:

not a single review nor DF's analysis even mentions how many more pop-in are in the Remaster compared to the PS3 version. Or what about when NPC companions make a lot of noise or walk in front of enemies unnoticed? I know that was something ND did deliberately but even then it still breaks the immersion, yet everyone just rates the game with 10/10 when there are obvious flaws. And this is not nitpicking, this stuff happens very often, both the pop-ins and the AI stuff.

I have said the AI thing since last July. Also the fact that Joel and Tess take the escort job in order to get their guns back. But through beginning of the game they could have picked up many guns of the people they killed. Terrible hole.

the fireflies at the end of the game all had military grade assault rifles. weapons like this are more than likely what joel and tess were doing the job for. Throughout the game, most enemies usually only had pistols and pipes and barely any ammunition to spare.

Studying writing now. You are placing a hole fix that isnt confirmed for the writers. Thats not good. If a writer introduces something in their story they need to address its validity and conflicts, not have the audience come up with maybe

Avatar image for speedfreak48t5p
#100 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (12927 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

you're an awful cow. what happened to you?

He was never a good cow to begin with. lol