f13.net

f13.net General Forums => Gaming => Topic started by: schild on June 05, 2013, 11:29:38 AM



Title: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 11:29:38 AM
Sony tends to always have an excellent swan song to sunset each generation.

Looks like this is going to be it.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 05, 2013, 11:31:39 AM
Yah, I"ll be getting this.  Looks like my PS3 will get to do some actual gaming again.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 05, 2013, 11:39:31 AM
It's no State of Decay though.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 12:09:39 PM
I don't even know why you're comparing the two, stop that.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 05, 2013, 01:45:48 PM
The giantbomb review makes it sound like naughty dog combined everything I hate about Metal Gear with a difficulty level like Dark Souls, added the resource scarcity of early Resident Evil or Metro 2033 and made the main mission to be a perpetual escort quest.

That's exactly the 'anti Uncharted' Patrick Klepek calls it.

This doesn't sound like the slightest bit fun to play.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: HaemishM on June 05, 2013, 01:52:48 PM
made the main mission to be a perpetual escort quest.

Welp, that evaporated any interest I might ever possibly have had in this game.

Fuck escort quests.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rendakor on June 05, 2013, 01:58:27 PM
Fuck escort quests.
This.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Trippy on June 05, 2013, 01:59:34 PM
Strangely enough the first review (http://www.polygon.com/game/the-last-of-us/3040) I read of this gave it a so-so rating (75%).


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 02:03:10 PM
Philip Kollar is a weaboo that was one of the only people not to give Demon's Souls a perfect score also.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 05, 2013, 02:03:45 PM
To be fair, I said it makes it sound like it. They talk about the girl you need to bring somewhere and a woman who's sort of your partner that accompanies you and also about other people who temporarily accompany you.

Maybe it's like Elizabeth in Bioshock and I'm misunderstanding the decription.

It doesn't sound even a little bit like something I want to play though.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 05, 2013, 02:04:18 PM

Yep, agreed. Plus if it's more about stealth and avoiding fights, I can do that at home.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 05, 2013, 02:10:03 PM
Philip Kollar is a weaboo that was one of the only people not to give Demon's Souls a perfect score also.

Please explain the appeal of Demon's Souls to me. Without its steep learning curve and unforgiving difficulty it would be an utterly bland and boring game. I never got into it and yet all veteran players sing its praise like it's the second coming of the gaming christ. (or Stockholm Syndrome)


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 02:11:23 PM
Quote
Without its steep learning curve and unforgiving difficulty it would be an utterly bland and boring game.

And without pixel-perfect precision and timing most fighting games would suck. When you're ready to not make arbitrary exclusions to a game we can talk about Demon's Souls.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 05, 2013, 02:20:15 PM
Well you sort of answered my question already. Since I really don't like fighting games at all it explains why I never saw the appeal of DS.

I always considered it to be difficult for difficulty's sake and I don't understand why being difficult makes a game suddenly better instead of simply boring and frustrating.

Your comparison with fighting games at least gives me an idea why it appeals to people in the first place. Not my cup of tea though.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 02:23:45 PM
My answer had nothing to do with fighting games. Your comment could've been "Without the ability to Jump, [Mario Bros] would be an utterly bland and boring game" or "Without the ability to control the X-Axis, [Tetris] would be an utterly bland and boring game."

It wasn't difficult for difficulty's sake. That's the thing you're missing. The difficulty was part of the design. The design is one with the difficulty.

You're basically missing the entire point.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 05, 2013, 02:27:01 PM
How is this anything like Demon's Souls other than both got good reviews?


Quote from: Jeff Kelly
I always considered it to be difficult for difficulty's sake and I don't understand why being difficult makes a game suddenly better instead of simply boring and frustrating.

Without difficulty isn't a "game" just "hold forward and mash buttons to win"?

You seem to be excluding the entire class of mastery-based games from being fun, whereas I would argue that mastery-based games are the core of what games are. Without difficulty what is a game? An "interactive experience / roller coaster ride" I suppose.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on June 05, 2013, 02:28:03 PM
Please explain the appeal of Demon's Souls to me. Without its steep learning curve and unforgiving difficulty it would be an utterly bland and boring game.

Reading stuff like this infuriates me. The fact that you felt like posting that, instead of keeping it to yourself as a dirty and shameful secret, really, brings up the rage. Anyway, to clarify, your statement is infinitely wrong.

On topic, I am gonna get Last of Us on day one. No doubts about it. If anything, the trailer makes it look like The Walking Dead game, only with a game this time. Sounds great.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 05, 2013, 02:30:21 PM
I don't want to further derail this thread so I'll try to find a way to phrase my question better and post it i. the DS thread.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 05, 2013, 02:45:21 PM
I'd be interested in the cutscene/gameplay ratio of a game like this in terms of time.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 05, 2013, 02:46:17 PM
Naughty Dog is usually pretty decent about that ratio.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 05, 2013, 02:47:37 PM
That's good, because it's important to me to tell a story through gameplay instead of just showing a story on the screen.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Fabricated on June 05, 2013, 03:30:09 PM
Word from actual human beings that aren't avatars of the gaming press is that this isn't really amazing or that interesting, and is entirely predictable in every way. Like a solid 7/10.

Gaming press?

(http://i.imgur.com/Gdawk2n.jpg)

I kinda hope anyone who unironically uses the "Citizen Kane for Gaming!" thing literally dies because fuck you.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 05, 2013, 03:37:22 PM
Yeah that's hyperbole beyond hyperbolics.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Goreschach on June 05, 2013, 03:46:40 PM
Exactly what Citizen Kane moment are they referring to, anyways? The one where we find out that Rosebud was the name of his shotgun?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 05, 2013, 05:43:58 PM
Probably the one where the people will think what we tell them to think.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 05, 2013, 05:44:51 PM
The Kane analogy is so irksome. It's overused and badly used. Nothing about TLOU appears to be transformative of the craft.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on June 05, 2013, 06:11:13 PM
It's marginally less irksome if you look at the full bit, rather than the part that is being taken slightly out of context (like review blurbs usually are):

Quote
The Last Of Us is not just the finest game that Naughty Dog has yet crafted and an easy contender for the best game of this console generation, it may also prove to be gaming’s Citizen Kane moment – a masterpiece that will be looked back upon favourably for decades.

Still hyperbolic review bullshit, but there's a slight difference between saying it is Citizen Kane, and saying that at some point it might be looked back on as such.

Edit: Point being that I find the ad touting the review blurb to be worse than the review itself.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 06:16:26 PM
I figured that image was put together by someone on Reddit.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 05, 2013, 06:36:12 PM
It's marginally less irksome if you look at the full bit, rather than the part that is being taken slightly out of context (like review blurbs usually are):

Quote
The Last Of Us is not just the finest game that Naughty Dog has yet crafted and an easy contender for the best game of this console generation, it may also prove to be gaming’s Citizen Kane moment – a masterpiece that will be looked back upon favourably for decades.

A "Citizen Kane moment" would be a moment that represents a major advance in craft and technique, not just "hey this is a pretty good product." Citizen Kane was shot by a first-time director who came at film with a fresh perspective and lack of knowledge of institutional norms. TLOU is by all accounts a particularly well-excuted version of where gaming is today. It's almost the opposite of Citizen Kane - a culmination rather than reinvention.

It's true that Citizen Kane is looked back upon favorably but that by itself is missing the point. It's like calling something a "Rosa Parks moment" because it takes place on a bus.

I don't know a ton about film but the story of Citizen Kane is really interesting. (I mean the making of it, not the narrative) It's basically the story of a guy doing cool stuff because he didn't know any better. Gaming could definitely use something like that.

Edit: Sometimes I think it would be fun to have a child or non-gamer "design" a game. Gamers tend to take a lot of nonsense for granted because they know the conventions, whereas kids and non-gamers tend to ask "why" and notice logical inconsistencies a lot more. For example most gamers just accept that a character that can climb a cliff face or jump off a skyscraper can't climb over a chair that denotes an invisible wall.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 05, 2013, 07:48:03 PM
Correct, the moron doesn't know the historical relevance of Citizen Kane. We can move on from this. Now.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: lamaros on June 06, 2013, 12:08:31 AM
But there are points to quibble over... :(


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 06, 2013, 12:10:17 AM
There will be more, all equally quibbleable.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on June 06, 2013, 01:28:29 AM
This coming from people I don't necessarily have any respect for, and it is NOT in regards to the Citizen Kane refeference (we moved along, right?), more about something I've been reading a lot everywhere lately, meaning the global complain that AAA titles have become more and more of the same, on rails, one big huge set piece after another, and it's inevitably only gonna be more like this. So, I do not support their thesis (since I haven't had a chance to try the game), but Edge addresses that specific complain and seems to think this is not the case (http://www.edge-online.com/review/the-last-of-us-review/) and since we are talking about an unreleased game I felt like adding this bit to the conversation.


Quote
At times it’s easy to feel like big-budget development has too much on the line to allow stubbornly artful ideas to flourish, but then a game like The Last Of Us emerges through the crumbled blacktop like a climbing vine, green as a burnished emerald.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on June 06, 2013, 01:54:34 AM
I am not going to lie.  For once, I really want the critics to be right about this one, because I have really been looking forward to it.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Lantyssa on June 06, 2013, 04:26:45 AM
There will be more, all equally quibbleable.
I don't know.  That was a pretty good point to quibble over...


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: rk47 on June 06, 2013, 05:52:49 AM
Correct, the moron doesn't know the historical relevance of Citizen Kane. We can move on from this. Now.

No. We can't move on, it's not bat country yet.

Quote
Metroid Prime was one: http://www.ign.com/articles/2009/10/08/citizen-prime-is-metroid-prime-our-citizen-kane
Dynasty Warriors was one: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vid...ynasty-Warriors-Is-The-Citizen-Kane-Of-Gaming
Journey was one: http://www.gamesradar.com/why-journey-one-greatest-games-ever-made/
Dear Esther was one: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...first-time-the-next-generation-of-game-design
Bioshock Infinite was one: http://www.gamestm.co.uk/reviews/bioshock-infinite-review/3/
Here's a list of 25 historic games that were apparently: http://www.gamesradar.com/the-citizen-kanes-of-videogames/
Also these games: http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2003/08/59964
David Cage's new game is predestined to be one: http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngau...rdware-and-create-the-citizen-kane-of-gaming/

All this stuff makes me want to watch Citizen Kane... is it as good as Bioshock Infinite or Dynasty Warriors? I've never seen it before? Will it make me want to be a warrior in china?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: rk47 on June 06, 2013, 05:55:54 AM
I am not going to lie.  For once, I really want the critics to be right about this one, because I have really been looking forward to it.

No, you should be happy Polygon is wrong.

(http://i.imgur.com/xUWxLJb.jpg)

Now excuse me while I masturbate furiously to naked 2D women while I await for the coming of Agarest: Generations of War on Steam.



Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 06, 2013, 06:15:30 AM
God, I hate gamer fanboys.

If the hive mind says that a game is crap and a few publications give it raving reviews they are all industry shills (yeah I'm sometimes guilty of that fallacy too), if the hive mind decided that a game - they haven't even played yet - is the Citizen Kane of gaming then publications that are giving it mixed reviews are haters, retarded and don't matter anyway.
 
A 7.5 OUT OF 10 IS STILL A GREAT REVIEW SCORE YOU STUPID FUCKS!

You can't complain about reviews being shit when you demand that everything either has to be a 10/10 or 0/10 depending whether you love or hate a game. For some even Citizen Kane is not the Citizen Kane of Citizen Kanes so it's entirely OK that not everybody likes it as much as you do.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: rk47 on June 06, 2013, 06:16:26 AM
You know what? They should make a game based on Citizen Kane. A third person shooter action RPG.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Fabricated on June 06, 2013, 06:18:04 AM
Don't read NeoGAF, thanks.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: murdoc on June 06, 2013, 06:25:04 AM
I am not going to lie.  For once, I really want the critics to be right about this one, because I have really been looking forward to it.

I'm with you on this, I really want this game to be good and right now it is pretty much the only game that I am itching to get my hands on.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: UnSub on June 06, 2013, 06:51:40 AM
So I spent a stupid amount of time to uncover the entirely shocking news that Day 1 review scores are positively biased (http://unsubject.wordpress.com/2013/06/05/are-day-1-game-reviews-positively-biased-short-answer-yes/), with 1 in 6 Day 1 review score averages being significantly higher than the average of the subsequent review scores. Only around 1 in 50 Day 1 review score averages are significantly lower than the average subsequent review scores.

There will be more, all equally quibbleable.

My quibble is that quibbleable isn't a real word.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Lakov_Sanite on June 06, 2013, 08:18:27 AM
Don't be so grammarably strict.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2013, 08:41:58 AM

A 7.5 OUT OF 10 IS STILL A GREAT REVIEW SCORE YOU STUPID FUCKS!

Not in the bizarro world of video games journalism (and for that matter the video game industry) where Metacritic scores determine payouts to fucking developers.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 06, 2013, 09:09:12 AM
I know!

It's because of stupid fucks like them that it is like that.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Threash on June 06, 2013, 09:19:10 AM
So has anyone actually played this or is this thread only about the reviews?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 06, 2013, 09:27:59 AM
There was a demo included on something.  But yah, it's all responses to the reviews at this point.  It releases next Friday (WHY NOT TUESDAY?).

My quibble is that quibbleable isn't a real word.

It should be.  It looks awesome.


7.5 is not a good review. It's not necessarily a bad one either.  Actually reading a review or paying attention to what is being said it more important that just blindly staring a score.  Hell, even Adam Sessler's 5 star rating contained a far amount criticism for the game.

Gamespot only gave this an 8 as well, which was the same score they gave to the first Uncharted.  In comparison, Uncharted 2 got a 95 and 3 got a 90.  However, the reviewer is McShea, and that guy is kind of a goober.  He seems to be their reviewer for Naughty Dog games.   Gamespot's scores are just weird sometimes (ie they gave Deus Ex: IW an 8, a whole .1 less than they gave the first Deus Ex).   


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 06, 2013, 10:28:47 AM
It releases next Friday (WHY NOT TUESDAY?).

Because movies release on Friday?  :why_so_serious:

Seriously, I have no idea, that's just odd.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Simond on June 06, 2013, 11:33:32 AM
God, I hate gamer fanboys.

If the hive mind says that a game is crap and a few publications give it raving reviews they are all industry shills (yeah I'm sometimes guilty of that fallacy too), if the hive mind decided that a game - they haven't even played yet - is the Citizen Kane of gaming then publications that are giving it mixed reviews are haters, retarded and don't matter anyway.
 
A 7.5 OUT OF 10 IS STILL A GREAT REVIEW SCORE YOU STUPID FUCKS!

You can't complain about reviews being shit when you demand that everything either has to be a 10/10 or 0/10 depending whether you love or hate a game. For some even Citizen Kane is not the Citizen Kane of Citizen Kanes so it's entirely OK that not everybody likes it as much as you do.
Thus spaketh The Magazine Of Champions (http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/ap2/)
Quote
"And lo it shall pass that the reviewer can't get off level one.

And he shall not care for the game, or want to play it for more than 20 minutes.

But lo, he shall be fearful of the software company dropping advertising, and missing him off the free crate of beer list at Christmas, and he shall tremble and quake mightily as all rival mags have given it a high score.

So he shall give it a score low enough to dissuade potential buyers, yet high enough to pacify the software people.

And that score shall be the NUMBER OF THE BEAST, and it shall be 73 per cent."
Near enough to 7.5


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Maledict on June 06, 2013, 01:00:41 PM
I dunno why  Neogaf gets the hatred - it has a lot of decent stuff on it amidst the morons. Maybe the moron to normal person ratio is slightly higher than say penny-arcade but you get the same type of idiots on all forums.

Re the game - Polygon is worth mocking simply because of their awful track record. They gave SimCity a review that was toe-curling ly sycophantic (disgustingly so), and they were originally set up with help from Microsft and then give an exclusive MS competitor's game a far lower than average score.

Polygon, like Tom Chick, simply are not to be trusted on interviews at all.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 06, 2013, 01:33:04 PM
The thing about reviews and scores is that many people fundamentally don't understand how they are supposed to work.

If you play a game and don't like it you should give it a low score. Whereas many people think you should instead predict whether other reviewers will like it and assign a score that aligns with the projected average. Which means that you aren't reviewing the game at all, you are simply predicting the score based on a loose consensus around what an "objectively good" game looks like. In this case an outlying score is "wrong."

Neogaf review-score whining is hilarious. Without fail if a hyped game gets an 8 or below there will be a hundred page thread about it, in which people alternate claims that they don't care about the score with freak-outs over the score.

As far as guys like Tom Chick - I don't find his reviews useful and as a freelancer he was often brought in to savage a game. But because I understand his viewpoint I can safely ignore his reviews - they do me no harm. And they are useful to people who share his tastes, so I don't see what the problem is. The least useful reviews are those with no internal consistency or discernible viewpoint.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 06, 2013, 01:36:44 PM
I don't agree with that sort of behavior (the neogaf sort). However, when a good game gets below 8, it basically means it was shit. Gaming reviews only really go from 7 to 10. We've only been over this about 400 TIMES on f13 already.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 06, 2013, 01:37:02 PM
Also, no one shares gaming taste with Tom Chick. The "people" that do are inhabitants of a plane that can't be seen with the naked eye. You need a puzzle box from the isle of Glorthos to communicate with them.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Maledict on June 06, 2013, 01:40:47 PM
My issue with Tom Chick isn't his shock reviews that slam big games - that's his thing, its what he does, you just ignore it. What I dislike is how some games get reviews that are far far better than they should be (his Bioshock 2 stuff was appalling), and how companies like Stardock seem to get a freer pass from the guy than say Civ 5. Slam civ 5 all you want but he never went after Stardock for putting out an unbelieveably broken shit game.

And yes, I think that the whining over scores is insanely wierd (and a bit funny). Uncharted 3 getting an 8, skyward sword a 7 and the world seems to end.

People shouldn't take reviews so seriously. I remember starcraft getting 8s across the board and being critisiced by the gaming press for not being innovative enough. Ignoring the fact it was the best single and multi-player RTS there's ever been even to this day.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Maledict on June 06, 2013, 01:42:10 PM
Also, no one shares gaming taste with Tom Chick. The "people" that do are inhabitants of a plane that can't be seen with the naked eye. You need a puzzle box from the isle of Glorthos to communicate with them.

Heh, it's been a while since someone made me honestly laugh out loud with a post.

I think sometimes he's okay, when discussing smaller games and the like. Sometimes.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 06, 2013, 01:47:22 PM
This is honestly why we trust people more on this forum, and why we should have our own metric that's not a score.

Perhaps a color system?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Fordel on June 06, 2013, 01:48:43 PM
Various gradients of brown.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Ingmar on June 06, 2013, 01:49:09 PM
My issue with Tom Chick isn't his shock reviews that slam big games - that's his thing, its what he does, you just ignore it. What I dislike is how some games get reviews that are far far better than they should be (his Bioshock 2 stuff was appalling), and how companies like Stardock seem to get a freer pass from the guy than say Civ 5. Slam civ 5 all you want but he never went after Stardock for putting out an unbelieveably broken shit game.

Well of course not, Brad Wardell is his buddy who posts on his forum. Objectivity? What's that?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Margalis on June 06, 2013, 01:52:09 PM
Bitching about reviews scores that are consistently too high or too low for a certain game is different than bitching about a couple outlying scores.

Outliers should be expected and encouraged - a system without outliers is most likely fundamentally broken. Outlying scores are indicators of critical diversity and subjective rather than faux-objective reviews - both good things. It's nobodies job to try to peg the mean.

Personally I have little interest in TLOU, will most likely never play it, and I assume if I did play it I wouldn't enjoy it very much. That view is not the majority opinion and the majority of review scores don't reflect it - but it is a valid minority opinion (well...presuming I had played the game and thought similarly) that at least some review scores should reflect. We generally don't expect critics in other mediums to review based on how they expect other critics or the public to react.

Especially now with Metacritic there's no need to try hit the average - if you want an average review score you can simply go to Metacritic. If you want a personal score from an individual you read individual reviews. It serves nobody for those to be the same.

Quote
Perhaps a color system?

Unskippable overlong cutscene alert status: orange.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 06, 2013, 01:55:21 PM
The redesign of f13 will have a system. If it's on our frontpage and its in a genre you like, it means it is probably worth playing.

I expect f13 to get less than 20 reviews a year because of this.

I think this is best for the industry.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: rk47 on June 06, 2013, 03:08:54 PM
You want me to play less than 20 new games a year?  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rendakor on June 07, 2013, 04:33:22 AM
So with the new redesign, when our frontpage goes a year or more without being updated you can blame the game industry?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2013, 06:24:32 AM
So with the new redesign, when our frontpage goes a year or more without being updated you can blame the game industry?

I think we should at least keep a list of games we rejected. I mean otherwise it's just a nebulous grey area of what did and didn't get a look.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Hoax on June 07, 2013, 06:47:20 AM
So with the new redesign, when our frontpage goes a year or more without being updated you can blame the game industry?

I think we should at least keep a list of games we rejected. I mean otherwise it's just a nebulous grey area of what did and didn't get a look.

Have you seriously forgotten how many games Schild is capable of playing in a year? Do we need to see another screen shot of his steam library. Worrying that something great was completely ignored is like when I used to try to watch the first four episodes of every single anime each season in case one was a hidden gem when I was a teen. That was fucking stupid.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2013, 06:49:22 AM
You misunderstand. I want the list more as a acknowledgement of the process, and to point out how horrible flawed the gaming industry can be with the weight of the list, not as a preventative measure of missing something.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on June 15, 2013, 05:01:05 AM
A couple hours in so far. All the hyperbole in the reviews now makes it hard to give this game praise it actually deserves, but I am thoroughly enjoying it so far. Also surprised the guy who does the voice acting for the main character is the same one who voiced Booker Dewitt in Bioshock Infinite. I thought his voice work was ok in Infinite but nothing special so I had to think for a few minutes why it seemed to be of a better quality in Last of Us. I suppose it's just because between the character design and the writing Joel seems like a more fleshed out person in my short amount of time playing than Booker did through the entirety of Infinite.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on June 15, 2013, 03:16:05 PM
I'm a little bit further in now, but haven't had a lot of time to play due to work. Also I tend to play shorter sessions with games like this that have a lot of tension since I end up feeling drained quicker. Gameplay-wise it seems to be a mix of stealth and survival horror. Ammo and supplies are fairly limited but so far most encounters are set up in a way where you can divide and conquer most groups of enemies without using weapons. I would expect this to change a bit later on as there is already one enemy that is immune to weaponless stealth takedowns and wouldn't be surprised to see more introduced later. Also due to super fast reload times, if you're feel you're taking too much damage or using too much ammo, it's fairly trivial to restart an encounter in order to try to do better.

If you play conservatively (frequently reloading and conserving on supplies and ammo) I might recommend Hard difficulty, although again this is based on my early impressions. So far I haven't been in danger of running out of ammo or health kits and most encounters you'll either get through almost without a scratch, or you'll mess up so badly you'll get torn apart or riddled with bullets.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: MournelitheCalix on June 15, 2013, 09:40:00 PM
I'm a little bit further in now, but haven't had a lot of time to play due to work. Also I tend to play shorter sessions with games like this that have a lot of tension since I end up feeling drained quicker. Gameplay-wise it seems to be a mix of stealth and survival horror. Ammo and supplies are fairly limited but so far most encounters are set up in a way where you can divide and conquer most groups of enemies without using weapons. I would expect this to change a bit later on as there is already one enemy that is immune to weaponless stealth takedowns and wouldn't be surprised to see more introduced later. Also due to super fast reload times, if you're feel you're taking too much damage or using too much ammo, it's fairly trivial to restart an encounter in order to try to do better.

If you play conservatively (frequently reloading and conserving on supplies and ammo) I might recommend Hard difficulty, although again this is based on my early impressions. So far I haven't been in danger of running out of ammo or health kits and most encounters you'll either get through almost without a scratch, or you'll mess up so badly you'll get torn apart or riddled with bullets.

I have completed the game.  I won't give any spoilers.  Don't look to this game to give you great choices or nonlinear gameplay.  Choice is absent, your lead around by the nose and its very linear.  The part about ammo becomes really frustrating towards the end as you seem to find ammo all the time for the weapons your already full on.  There is some really neat moments in this game.  There is one part where you trigger a trap which was really very intense.  I won't spoil it but that was the first moment since the unreal elevator scene that really impressed me in a FPS.    The character voice acting I think was top notch.  As you progress you find some other friendlier survivors.  Their actors did a great job as well.
 
Its a good game but there are some problems.  I played the PS3 version, and some of the cut scenes weren't finished.  There were some death scenes for instance where you would see two colored (top and bottom) "green screens" and the characters going through their animations.  I hated some parts of the level design.  I won't go into that yet (not wanting to give spoilers), but there are some areas and sequences that I found misleading and frustrating.  Lastly Ellie... I keep going back and forth on her implimentation.  On one hand some of the things she does is annoying such as expose you when your trying to sneak by taking the angle you want.  On the other hand, she is a kid and it seems fairly realistic that kids would do that placed in that situation.  

On the whole not a bad game at all.  I enjoyed it thoroughly.  Glad I rented it though because like Bioshock Inifinity, I have no desire to replay it at all.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Trippy on June 16, 2013, 12:49:23 AM
I played the PS3 version, and some of the cut scenes weren't finished.
Naughty Dog is owned by Sony. This game, like the Uncharted series before it, is a PS3 exclusive.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: MournelitheCalix on June 16, 2013, 06:45:47 AM
Naughty Dog is owned by Sony. This game, like the Uncharted series before it, is a PS3 exclusive.

That is very... interesting.  I am primarily a PC gamer and other than Heavy Rain, I don't remember playing any other PS3 exclusives (I have never played any of the Uncharted games).   While TLoU is as I said before a decent game, I would have thought that Sony would have made more of an effort on this title.  A bit more choice would have been an obvious way to improve the game.  That being said I guess now some of the rave reviews makes a bit more sense.  Lets give it a few more days, lets give people a bit more time to finish it, and then I would love to talk some specifics on the title.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 16, 2013, 08:12:03 AM
Choice? In a Naughty Dog game? 

I'm not very far in yet, as I've just gotten the girl. I haven't had much time to play yet with my son having his birthday party this weekend. I was just too exhausted to play this type of game last night. Intro(s) were pretty well crafted and the voice acting so far is top notch.

The feel, presentation, and flow so far feel nearly identical to the Uncharted series.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on June 16, 2013, 10:31:07 PM
I am probably about 4 hours into it or so.  I rather like it.  The opening/intro was really quite excellent, and as the others have mentioned, the voice work is fantastic.  The graphics are a bit uneven...occasionally awesome, but also occasionally artifacted and blotchy.  Overall pretty nice, though.  Combat I was initially worried about.  Part of the problem for me is that because the gun-play is often not the best choice, you don't have to use it much.  And with any console shooting mechanic, when I don't have to use it much, I fucking suck at it.  Takes me a while to get re-accustomed to it, and since I don't have to use it that much in this game...it means that whenever I do need it, it turns into some panicky flailing mess of a situation.  Which actually kind of adds to the atmosphere in a strange way.  That said, the sneak/stealth combat is pretty easy to get used to and quite satisfying for the most part, even if it is a little too easy to sneak up on things.  The more I play, the more I like.  Nothing like going into a situation against a bunch of baddies with nothing but a single bullet in your pistol.  Makes you think about your approach.

The game is linear as all fuck.  I mean, I understand why they do that in games like this, but still.  Even in the sprawling city wasteland that is the starting area, you are never in doubt that there is one, and only one, path through the rubble to get to your destination.  Would have been nice if they would have at least attempted to open things up once in a while.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Trippy on June 16, 2013, 10:40:57 PM
It's nice that the game lets you save and load from anywhere, unlike the normal console checkpoint bullshit that these games normally have.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Jeff Kelly on June 17, 2013, 03:09:02 AM
How does the linearity compare to Uncharted 2 or 3.

Uncharted also was linear as fuck but it did a very great job to hide that fact from you. Either by what I think is very great set design or by putting you in intense situations where you don't notice it.

It seems that the linearity is more noticeable in the last of us?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on June 17, 2013, 04:18:33 AM
Yes, it is more noticeable IMO.  If I remember well enough, Uncharted hides it better by adding platformy and puzzle-solving elements for you to find the correct pathway.  In LoU, you are rarely in doubt as to exactly where you have to go next, despite there being no map or radar of any sort.  Some of this makes sense in the context of the game, as you are (in the beginning, at least) trying to find a path through building rubble in an area that has otherwise been cordoned off by the military.  In many cases, these are paths that you have presumably created yourself over the years as a smuggler.  If what others say is true, however, this linearity continues throughout the game, and that disappoints me a little bit.

But only a little.  It is good game.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: schild on June 18, 2013, 12:09:44 PM
WHY DID NO ONE TELL ME IT STARTS IN AUSTIN

had to find out from Day9s stream.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 18, 2013, 02:59:23 PM
Just looked like generic suburban Texas.

Really enjoying this.  But man... fuck Clickers.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on June 18, 2013, 04:30:49 PM
How does the linearity compare to Uncharted 2 or 3.

Uncharted also was linear as fuck but it did a very great job to hide that fact from you. Either by what I think is very great set design or by putting you in intense situations where you don't notice it.

It seems that the linearity is more noticeable in the last of us?

I wasn't expecting anything other than linearity here, so that part doesn't bother me too much.  There are occasionally areas that you can explore a bit more though. My only real issue so far is that the story occasionally relies on some fairly well worn zombie movie tropes and telegraphs them far enough in advance that what should be a shocking moment lacks a lot of the impact it could have had. Still feel like I've got a little ways to go, so hopefully the ending at least isn't something I'll see coming.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on June 19, 2013, 03:23:00 AM
Anyone tried multiplayer?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on June 19, 2013, 10:26:37 AM
Well, I did. It's interesting. There's some sort of "continuity" to your matches, as you pick a faction and are supposed to stick with it for at least 12 (real time?) weeks. The result of these random matches contribute to the advancement of your faction or the opposite faction (Fireflies and Hunters), so at the end of the 12 weeks period a winner/survivor will be declared. There are a few more mechanics in place but I couldn't really figure them out. The matches are 4 vs 4 and they aren't too bad except, you know, joypad. That totally kills my desire to care.

Anyway, single player seems awesome so far. I don't care it's on rails, it's a movier after all (and on that aspect, wow, not only the whole protect the girl is straight out of the Walking Dead game, but the first sequence with the car... what a coincidence). My only gripe is that your character moves like a tank. So slugglish, I was almost surprised. Like, really? Really?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: MournelitheCalix on June 19, 2013, 08:11:14 PM
Anyway, single player seems awesome so far. I don't care it's on rails, it's a movier after all (and on that aspect, wow, not only the whole protect the girl is straight out of the Walking Dead game, but the first sequence with the car... what a coincidence). My only gripe is that your character moves like a tank. So slugglish, I was almost surprised. Like, really? Really?

I will defend the sluggishness on this one.  The guy you play, Joel, is not a spring chicken here.  When the game takes place he is OLD.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: jakonovski on June 21, 2013, 06:12:24 AM
Beat it. What a game! It was way longer than I thought, good on Naughty Dog to buck the trend on 6 hour games.

I wanna talk about the story but seems like no one else is done with it yet. Going to play some more multiplayer, it's a fun diversion and the antithesis of leet headshots.



Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Abelian75 on June 21, 2013, 08:40:15 AM
I just finished it as well, and man, that was pretty good shit.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on June 21, 2013, 01:44:27 PM
Finished it yesterday, and yeah it was a bit longer than I was expecting. Actually felt like a long journey.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Nayr on June 21, 2013, 04:54:58 PM
I'll probably buy the game next month, assuming I have the cash.

From what I've heard and seen, this sounds like it should be called "I Am Legend - The Video Game". I'm not saying it to be critical, it looks like a deep story and a captivating experience, but there are such parallels that it's kinda funny.



Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rendakor on June 21, 2013, 07:33:31 PM
All of that refers to I Am Legend - The Terrible Film Adaptation; very little of it is in the original book.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Nayr on June 21, 2013, 08:12:05 PM
All of that refers to I Am Legend - The Terrible Film Adaptation; very little of it is in the original book.

True.

And they seldom do stay close to the originals. As I know, the novel of I Am Legend was sort of a vampire story.

But that's the way it goes. A new adaptation often comes with a new interpretation. Which isn't always a bad thing.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Lounge on June 24, 2013, 11:57:31 AM
Finished this yesterday.  I wish I had cranked this fucker down to easy and just cruised through the game for the story.  I think I would have enjoyed it a whole lot more.

Ran into what I thought was some missing audio in one particular cut scene.  Checked youtube this morning and the one video I found had what feels like missing audio there as well.  No sound no subtitles but clearly moving lips.  Curious if anyone had audio in in this one part.



Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: jakonovski on June 24, 2013, 01:57:26 PM
I had the same sound issue, but mitigated since I always keep subtitles on.

As for difficulty, I found the game a cakewalk on medium. I'm curious, which part was a problem for you?


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Lounge on June 24, 2013, 05:00:30 PM
I had the same sound issue, but mitigated since I always keep subtitles on.

As for difficulty, I found the game a cakewalk on medium. I'm curious, which part was a problem for you?

I had subtitles on (so did the video).  It almost looks like they decided to cut what he said at the last minute and just not reanimate the scene.

As for difficulty I just found the game to be extremely unforgiving once you were seen.  Not in a fun way that you can learn from (Dark Souls) but in a "fuck you there's only one way to do this" kind of way.  If I hadn't been far enough along to get hooked by the characters/story before I got frustrated I probably wouldn't have muscled through this one to the end.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Rasix on June 27, 2013, 03:20:24 PM
Finished this.  Best Naughty Dog game I've played.  Granted, that only includes the Uncharted series.  

Ending was pretty interesting.  They went in a direction that I guess you could expect, but it's still a bit jarring to see.

Joel is a hell of a character.  Tommy: "Joel, do your thing."  /shivers

I didn't have a problem with the difficulty.  Lots of accidentally clicker deaths and non-Joel deaths, but even when I got discovered, you could either blast your way out or run to a safe location and regroup.  I'm just a really shitty shot with a thumbstick.

I had the same sound issue, but mitigated since I always keep subtitles on.

I had subtitles on.  They didn't subtitle that bit of missing audio.  It almost seems like they didn't want you to hear what Joel says to Ellie or it's a piece of deleted audio that they didn't complete the change in animation for.  Or it's just a bug.

I turned subtitles on due to this bit of warning. I wish I had left them off.  You got subtitles for audio that was spoken too far away from you to actually hear.

edit: err yah, what Lounge said.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on July 10, 2013, 07:20:28 AM
I just finished this as well.  Feel it needs more words.  One of the most enjoyable games I have ever played.  Naughty Dog makes some real high quality stuff, and they probably don't get enough credit for it.  The Citizen Kane comparisons are ridiculous, obviously, but I think that it bears mentioning that for all the games out there that rated 9/10 or 95%....this is better than almost all of those games, and therefore, IMO, deserving of the perfect score it was given in so many cases.  There are complaints that can be made, but most of them would be missing the point.  The whole is vastly greater than the sum of the parts.


Couple things that surprised me:


Anyway, loved it. 


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Furiously on July 10, 2013, 10:28:01 PM
With the way this ended a sequel would be horrid...


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: dalien on July 11, 2013, 01:48:58 PM
There was an interview with the devs about the possibility of a sequel, and they basically said "we want to create more stories/games in this world, but Joel and Ellie's story is over".  It would be cool to have them show up for a cameo in future games, maybe even travel with them for a bit if it's during the same time period.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Azazel on October 04, 2014, 08:08:17 PM
Necropost!

So I've just gotten this (Remastered) for the PS4. I'm a couple of hours in, making my way through the skyscraper and gotten my first molotov with the encounter that follows shortly afterwards. I'm getting annoyed and frustrated as all fuck with the AI woman who runs in blazing like a CoD player when I'm trying to pull stealth kills on clickers.

After reading the thread (and skipping the spoilers) I'm wondering if I should do what Lounge suggested above, restart and turn the difficulty down and play through it for the story. It's so linear and scripted that like a few other games I've played in the past, I'm more interested in playing through it to see the story than playing it as an actual game (since it's a better "interactive story" than videogame. Reminds me a lot of Mafia II in that sense. Decent story (great for a game, not nearly as brilliant compared to a book, TV series or film) paired with average to sub-par incredibly linear gameplay.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on October 05, 2014, 12:47:42 AM
The gameplay in this game, IMO, is good enough to be bearable...but you are in it for the story.  For all games like this, I turn the difficulty down to whatever the easiest level is that doesn't make it stupidly easy.  You want some tension in the combat, but the combat itself is not the point of this game.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Azazel on October 05, 2014, 12:58:26 AM
Yep, I restarted it and turned it down to Easy. The gameplay/mechanics are really quite weak - or truly average at best (IMO) and I'm not interested in "challenge" or frustration in a game where I'm so clearly led around by the nose in it's linearity - and as you said - am really only here for the story.

Besides, I want to have it finished ASAP so I can get stuck into Shadow of Mordor when it gets its local release in 3 days.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Trippy on October 05, 2014, 01:54:25 AM
Yes the combat is frustrating since it's so unforgiving and the checkpoints are spaced so far apart. Plus it's a LOLconsoleshooter, made even worse cause of gun sway. I switched it down to Easy too. However I've never seen Tess attacks something on her own when I'm crouched unless I've been spotted. If she attacked a Clicker on her own most likely you were already detected.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Velorath on October 05, 2014, 02:00:25 AM
I played on Normal and after the first few hours didn't have too many problems with the difficulty. Once you've got a variety of weapons and are always staying almost fully stocked on crafted stuff things become a bit easier.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Azazel on October 05, 2014, 02:17:31 AM
I played on Normal and after the first few hours didn't have too many problems with the difficulty. Once you've got a variety of weapons and are always staying almost fully stocked on crafted stuff things become a bit easier.

I got frustrated when


Besides, I figure games usually amp up the difficulty, and since the whole game is a form of escort quest, I'd rather keep the frustration caused by idiot allied AI to a minimum.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Cyrrex on October 05, 2014, 05:17:08 AM
I have no memory of the AI ever doing anything like that, despite the fact that you are almost always paired up in this game.  Chances are you won't run into this again, or at least not often.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Trippy on October 05, 2014, 09:17:11 AM
With Ellie it's different but even with Tess I never had the issue Azael is describing. I still say he's doing something with Joel that's making Tess react that way.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Teleku on October 05, 2014, 03:58:08 PM
I played through the whole game on normal, and the AI characters never caused agro once.  Only by doing something that made them detect me would cause them to attack.  Maybe they patched or changed something in the new release?

I mean, PA even made fun of it.

(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-GLQjhhF/0/1050x10000/i-GLQjhhF-1050x10000.jpg)


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: K9 on October 20, 2014, 02:07:25 AM
I'm playing through the remastered version too; the AI characters will start shooting if you aggro an enemy, but I think they can also engage if you draw your own gun and aim it (I think...). Generally if you stay in stealth and remain undetected they will never engage.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Amarr HM on May 07, 2015, 05:10:58 AM
Necropost #2: Don't own a PS or have time to play through any games these days, but I always hankered to check this out loving the genre and all. So just sat through the youtube movie version. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkLPKd-Vs8g). Agree with all said above, wasn't bothered that I didn't get to interact - the story/acting/dialogue held its own.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Amarr HM on May 07, 2015, 05:28:53 AM
It was definitely not the Citizen Kane of video games. I found the Walking Dead game (which I also watched on yt) more moving and thought provoking.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on May 07, 2015, 05:46:53 AM
There is no Citizen Kane of videogames as that means absolutely nothing anyway. That doesn't change that this one was a very good game.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Amarr HM on May 07, 2015, 06:49:32 AM
 A very good game yes (story ahem). It was a decade or more after Kanes release that it's influence was realised, so if it was even possible to have a Citizen Kane of videogames it's probably been and gone. Half life would have a good case for it.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Samwise on May 07, 2015, 09:33:21 AM
Last of Us was more like the Walking Dead of movies than the Citizen Kane of video games.

 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Malakili on May 07, 2015, 09:35:39 AM
I would submit that if you can watch a video game and get almost the same thing out of it that you would playing it, then it isn't a very great game.


Title: Re: The Last of Us
Post by: Falconeer on December 03, 2016, 05:44:23 PM
NECRO!

The Last of Us 2 revealed. Here's the teaser trailer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Wnvvj33Wo