@Stabba_The_Kutt @Gamer_4_Fun @themc_7 I second that. Metal Gear games' stories make little sense, and there are always confusing, vague, or inexplicable parts in them. Actually, I think that MG games do certain things really, really, really well, and they indeed surpass the level of sophistication of their time, they're always ahead of all other games by several years, so much so that most gamers and fans are willing to give a blind eye to so many awkward things in them. Like confusing plots, inexplicable events, exaggeration, sometimes a strange sense of humor, sometimes painfully long narrative and cutscenes, and so on; the games are far from perfect, and do have some Japanese influence that can feel alien or awkward or extreme and exaggerated or incomprehensible to a lot of cultures out there. But as I said, the games are also so much ahead of their time that a lot of gamers are willing to give a blind eye to all that, and just enjoy the futuristic awesomeness. I don't think the story makes any of the games "epic", though, and that's a shame, because only a good and cohesive story can make anything truly epic and unforgettable in the minds of a lot of people.

@Gravity_Slave That's if I'm talking about one clear idea. Seeing as to how we're discussing very complex issue, like whether morality and rightness can be grey or only black & white, and seeing as to how this is an issue that produces days of debate, I think I'm doing very well. Thanks.

@cooolio @shunkwugga1 Mate, call it like it is, and you'll have a much easier job knowing right from wrong. Use the correct words, that is. For example, the brutality and evils committed by characters do [not] make them more "human"; it makes them more "realistic", yes, but human? Hell, no, it makes them more and more realistic an barbaric, monstrous creatures. Yes, such creatures exist in the real world, but that doesn't make them human!

And if you found yourself wondering what [you] would do in their place, and had no answer to that, that's your problem, mate, it doesn't mean that the choice is that gray if you have a clear moral compass in life. People with clear moral compasses and rules do not wonder for days whether they should kill this attacker for self-defense or not, or whether they should murder this innocent "just in case" or not!

And I'm not saying that the world will remain pure and rosy in extreme economic scarcities like what post-apocalyptic world are like, but I'm saying that games like this one are actually contributing to the mass mentality that would cause the "world" to become this dark and evil and unforgiving and selfish. For [what] exactly is the "world", mate, if not simply the majority of humans living in it? If the majority of humans really succumb to becoming like Joel, Tess, and Bill, then yes, we'll have a world like that, and that's what the game is encouraging subconsciously, because while someone like you wonders and is puzzled what he would have done in Joel's place, others are actually empathizing and "learning" from Joel. I hope that makes sense; if it doesn't, then you're well in your way of being brainwashed.

And humans are not the real monsters; humans are being taught to become monsters by games and movies like these, mate. Someone like me understands that that is not how human beings ought to live, and that my survival, and even the survival of those I love, does NOT mean that I must do wrong! For example, I can't kill someone "just in case"; my clear moral compass would oblige me to find another way to minimize the risk on me and those I love, and if the best I could do (without murdering innocents) doesn't work out and someone I love still gets killed, my faith and belief system (and yes, it is actually religious) inspire me to accept fate, and see that everything happens for a reason, a good reason, whether we find out about it sooner or later, eventually. Even the most horrible things, like the death of one's child, can sometimes reveal themselves later on in life as events of mercy.

@Treadstone86 I understand that that's a message or vision that a lot of video games (and movies) try to sell to the world today: “nothing is black or white, evil or good, right or wrong, and the whole world is just shades of gray, and it's better that way, more realistic, more mature, fairer, and just nicer and better, and so on and on”. I also understand that intelligent people like yourself buy into this devious vision of our world...a world with no right and wrong anymore. But thankfully, there are still people who know better.

I also know a big reason why our world is fairly easily being turned into this sort of vision: it's because most people today have no real authority figure. God was the authority figure for a lot of people in the past, and unfortunately, corrupt religious leaders used that to fool the masses and convince them that God wants this and that, and that was never really true, but just what corrupt religious leaders or disciples relayed to the masses. Today, many people don't believe in God, or believe that God is a man-made entity, or believe in actually man-made deities like shape-shifting deities or humans turned into deities, or whatever else that is not God and thus does not hold them accountable and certainly does not tell them right from wrong. In a world like this, it is easy to convince people like you there is no right or wrong...that it's all relative. But there [is] right and wrong, black and white; and the shades of gray are only due to ignorance of mankind, that's all.

Does that mean that someone like me will demonize the person doing evil? Does that mean that I cannot forgive the evildoer? Far from it. It is evil itself, the wrongdoing itself, which I hate, mate. The moment Joel stops being a selfish, bitter, cynical, ungrateful, mean, and casual murderer and prick, I am very capable of smiling at him and feeling genuine care about him. Can I empathize with his current way of life and actions? Heck, no, and that's because I [know] it is wrong, evil, black, NOT grey.

There is always right and wrong, mate, always. That does NOT mean that we always [know] or can always tell them apart, but that inability or failure to tell them apart is only due to our ignorance or lack of an authority figure who convinces us that so and so is wrong and right. Meaning, just because we don't know or are not sure (yet?), it does not mean that it doesn't exist or is not there or is not true. Hope that makes sense.

So, no, your thinking is not more mature or better for the world, to put it very frankly.

@shunkwugga1 I see what you're talking about there, but I doubt that that's what Tom meant when he mentioned that the supporting characters are rarely sympathetic. Most likely, almost positively, he means that almost all supporting characters are unsympathetic with Joel...Tess didn't show him any kindness or niceness whatsoever, certainly nothing verbally; Bill, ditto; his brother turns from the affectionate hugging strangely 180 degrees to complete lack of enthusiasm or sympathy when Joel introduces him to the first tangible hope for mankind, a real potential for a cure; and so on. Basically, Tom most probably means that supporting characters are all being jerks 24/7, and that's totally true.

I'm that much more positive about this interpretation because none of the characters were flat for me at all; on the contrary, all of them were very memorable, especially because they were voiced and animated extremely well. Tess is interesting and memorable, eve Bill is, Tommy is, even Robert from the beginning is interesting too! They're all really interesting, but the fact that they're also [all] jerks and unsympathetic pricks is just shockingly depressing and leaves a bad aftertaste.

@Treadstone86 Mate, your statement is only true if the character is obviously the main evil character; on the other hand, if any main character is not obviously evil, then it is automatically and inherently glorified in the eyes of countless people who consume that piece of fiction, whether it is a movie or game. This is [especially] true if the piece of fiction presents [other] characters in conflict with that protagonist, and those other characters are obviously or mostly evil. Joel is a hero in the eyes of hundreds of thousands of fan out there; make no mistake. So to pretend that he was not glorified is just lazy or deceitful or ignorant. Fiction today is much more subtle and there's a lot going on in the subtext for the subconscious; if you can't see the glorification and/or encouragement of empathy with Joel, then that's your problem or lack of understanding; it is all obvious to me. And who is Joel? He's a freaking prick. But then again, why should be be surprised? Naughty Dog glorified a thief with the very fun Uncharted series...now they've just upgraded to glorifying a murderer and cynical, selfish bastard.

And Tom, if what you meant by the lack of sympathy was that this game tries to justify living like a selfish jerk if the world is in harsh economic conditions, by glorifying a jerk like Joel and making him the star of the game and world, then I wholeheartedly agree with you. Humanity can do MUCH better than Joel in a post-apocalyptic world, but alas...as you see, we live in a world of zombies and brainwashed puppets who get told how to live in any world, and they listen faithfully. But yes, that apocalyptic world does NOT justify having so many people like Joel, Tess, and Bill in it. We can do much better than this crap.

@Treadstone86 Dude, as I mentioned in a longer comment, the biggest jerk in this game is Joel himself. Yes, most of the supporting characters secretly "care" (and I gave examples); a deep person can see this. But that doesn't deny the fact that almost all the characters are just a-holes and jerks, and they (and you) justify their inhumane and selfish approach to life by the circumstances around them, and the post-apocalyptic alternative reality of their world. For people like me, that's a sad excuse. A post-apocalyptic world does not justify living selfishly and adopting the precaution of "Shoot first, abandon first, ignore first, and ask questions never", dude; that may be your view and the view of people like you, and the view of the creators or inspiration figure(s) of Joel as a character, but it's not the view of people like me. This game [is] indeed testing people and checking how they'd behave and react in a world like this, and apparently we could have way too many Joels and Tesses in a world with harsh economical conditions, and what a shame.

My hero in this game is Ish, and I do hope that there will be more Ishes in a harsh world, than people like Joel, Tess, and you (after all, you're defending them, so you'd be one of them in a world like that). Well, screw you, my friend. Humanity can be much better than this crap.

Actually...before I played the game, I was skeptical about this review; after I played the game for a while, I was as cynical as many fans about this review; now that I have finished the game a few times, including at the Survivor and Survivor+ difficulties, I think that this "score" is fair enough for this shamefully and unexpectedly buggy release.

Unfortunately, I cannot say that I agree with the [reasons] listed in this review for giving it a score that's less than 9; I repeat, I think that the reasons are a bit ridiculous, because the supporting characters may only be "overtly" unsympathetic, but any person with depth would see that they actually really care...all of them cared [SPOILER ALERT], Tommy cared (the way he hugged his brother), Tess cared (it was "hard" for her, and she practically sacrificed herself for the rest although she was overtly pushing Joel away), even Bill cared (he gave Joel a gas-siphoning hose when he didn't really have to), so yeah...and the listening skill "exploit" can be turned off, and not available at all at the highest difficulty...not sure about any other exploits really. So yeah, such reasons are ridiculous to lower the score. HOWEVER...

I agree with the fairness of the score for other reasons: the launch day server issue messing up our autosaving (also known as the autosave bug), wasting 8 hours from my time that day, and thousands of hours in total for a lot of gamers out there; that alone is shameful. Not just shameful, but also very questionable: I have to ask, what the HELL was Naughty Dog's server doing with our autosaving in a single-player game ANYway?? Is this is some sort of "Big Brother" monitoring thing where they collect data? Why not collect their damn data AFTER a player finishes their playing session, just before exiting the game or something? Why was Naughty Dog's server interfering with our autosaving in a single-player game?? Huh?

And until this day, trophy bugs that make a lot of gamers and completionists out there feel sooo frustrated due to finishing the game once and twice just to get a certain trophy or two, and STILL not getting it, in spite of using guides to the letter. Today, patch 1.02 is out, and they STILL have not dealt with those trophy bugs or glitches. And ironically, trophy guides for the game recommend that we do NOT install the 1.01 patch, or uninstall it if we already installed it, in order to have a higher chance of earning the trophies! And at Survivor difficulty, I found no immersion-breaking "exploits", but I did find were immersion-breaking enemy advantages! Like Runners and Clickers spotting my character when this would have been impossible from a realistic perspective AND incompatible with the behavior of the same enemies in other areas of the game.

So yes, all in all, I may disagree with a lot of the reasoning this review uses to give a score of 8 instead or 9 or 9.5, BUT...I actually agree with the score itself! I did not expect this sort of finishing from the developer that gave us the Uncharted saga; yes, I'm very disappointed in The Last of Us's bugs, and I think that a score of 8.0 is fair for this game, so that Naughty Dog knows better, and they try harder next time, when they produce a sequel or something. A few graphical hiccups or minor glitches is not a big issue, and just makes a game deserve 9.5 instead of a perfect 10, but bugs that waste thousands of hours for thousands of gamers? Bugs that turn an enjoyable game into a frustrating exercise of repetitive attempts to score a stubborn, buggy trophy? Bugs that break immersion in an otherwise very immersive and creative world and game? No, not acceptable at all. And by the way, it's not the supporting characters that are rarely sympathetic or unsympathetic, Tom...the biggest jerk in this game is Joel himself! He is such a bitter, unpleasant person, and I know people like him in real life; yeah, yeah, realistic, but a jerk nevertheless; and many other characters, aside from Ellie, are also just unpleasant. My hero in this game is Ish.

And again, yeah, fair score!