What I think of this game *spoilers*

#21BurdicusPosted 7/3/2013 6:14:58 AM
I feel like when people judge the 'gameplay' element, they only judge it on wht the character is able to do, and not actually each individual piece of the gameplay.

Yes, you can stealth kill, melee, or shoot. BUT there are many different scenarios throughout the game where choosing the wrong option at the wrong time will cause you a lot of trouble. There are different types of enemies that need to be handled very different ways. For example, I relied on melee combat a lot my first run through, and this ended up making Winter rather challenging as I had to adjust my strategy. Not to mention I had to think before I acted everytime a clicker was around.

The gameplay is so incredibly balanced (and the multiplayer did a great job too, with some of the best, most balanced maps I've seen to date), and the weapon selection is plentiful, not to mention the crafting system is incredibly smooth and doesn't require you to go menu diving and lose all of your immersion in the game.

When you start looking at it as a whole, and not just "I can sneak, shoot, or melee" you see the amount of effort put into the details that make the game play so smoothly.

Gameplay for me is a solid 9.5/10 for paying attention to all the details...

Aside from gameplay, the one point I NEED to disagree with TC on is music. The music was far more than 'ok' it was excellent! More is less when it comes to setting the tone, and near the end when the music kicks in it almost pushed me over the edge to tears.
---
Currently playing: Ni No Kuni, Dragon's Dogma
Currently replaying: FFVIII, SotC
#22scm60Posted 7/3/2013 6:19:43 AM
swiftest posted...
This is likely what Naughty Dog or more specifically Neil Druckmann was worried about. The idea that gamers weren't ready for a tale like The Last of Us. We've grown up on Resident Evil, which emphasises nasty creatures and a wacky plot as its good points. Thus the importance and details of the zombie outbreak and the reasons behind it are what we call good and a game that doesn't focus on these details has somehow got it wrong. What The Last of Us does is something reminiscent of The Road. The importance and emphasis is not on the disaster, that matters very little, it just happens. There's an outbreak and that's it. What makes the game so brilliant is it focuses on how the outbreak shapes humanity and what it means to be human, rather than Resident Evil's laughably bad plot about how evil crazy scientist humans shaped the outbreak.

The Last of Us is the first true mature tale in gaming. It made me realise just how poor and gamey everything else I laud to be a great story in video games. Deus Ex, MGS, FFX, all pale so much in comparison to the moral ambiguity and societal deconstruction attempted in The Last of Us. It holds up a mirror to society and forces you to look. It does what all great 60's Sci-Fi did, show us a vision of the dystopian future to make us question how we live our lives today. For example the scene where Ellie comments on a model and how slim she was, remarking casually that it was stupid. It is these moments that you realise just how artificial and fabricated our current existence is, the assumptions we live under and most importantly, what we perceive as good and humane.

The game and its characters by our standards are monsters, but really they're no better or worse than animals, they're simply surviving and existing. The concept of humanity or humane behaviour has disappeared under these circumstances which is what makes the dilemma at the end of the game so pivotal and questionable. Its not simply a case of life or death, but rather whether anything around is still worth saving. For that reason, the game does something nothing else in the medium before it has attempted.


Well said! Very insightful and really gets to the heart of the game -- and by heart I also mean the emotional depth that few (if any) games have ever reached.
---
I was wondering why that Frisbee kept getting bigger - and then it hit me.
#23TohruAdachiPosted 7/3/2013 9:03:47 AM
CADE FOSTER posted...
Reviews say 10/10 I believe professionals over you


Professionals? Some of these "professionals" are just major fan boys who can't get over the fact that the game does indeed has some flaws. Personally 9/10 for me.
#24LunarHeart(Topic Creator)Posted 7/4/2013 3:42:15 AM
evidpeed posted...
No depth to the story? The infection and spread of it is explained...what else needs to happen. The story is about trying to survive and the survivors. The infection happened and the game takes place 20 years later.


Well, when I play games I often judge the Story and character both apart from each other and how the mold with each other. I think the character relations within the story was very well executed, while the Infected part just felt like they threw in a reason to have something to kill etc. They barely scratched the surface of what made the world the way it is, I have a hard time caring about the world when I can't see the reasons why things are what they are.

I think the basic core of the story could have been made in 5 minutes by almost any writer out there. The character progressions was above average without doubt thought and not so easily achieved, but still... I didn't care much for the world while progressing through it. The game was 18 hours long my first playthrough, I mean come on, they could at least have given 2 hours + of the story to dive into some depths. And not just keeping it like an Escort mission for ALL of that time.

Also: Didn't know Manhunt had the Bricks and Bottles, another minus on originality when it comes to the game-play.
---
FUNNY FUNNY FUNNY show - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjYBf4sdwI8
#25hyperknees91Posted 7/4/2013 3:55:40 AM
LunarHeart posted...
evidpeed posted...
No depth to the story? The infection and spread of it is explained...what else needs to happen. The story is about trying to survive and the survivors. The infection happened and the game takes place 20 years later.


Well, when I play games I often judge the Story and character both apart from each other and how the mold with each other. I think the character relations within the story was very well executed, while the Infected part just felt like they threw in a reason to have something to kill etc. They barely scratched the surface of what made the world the way it is, I have a hard time caring about the world when I can't see the reasons why things are what they are.

I think the basic core of the story could have been made in 5 minutes by almost any writer out there. The character progressions was above average without doubt thought and not so easily achieved, but still... I didn't care much for the world while progressing through it. The game was 18 hours long my first playthrough, I mean come on, they could at least have given 2 hours + of the story to dive into some depths. And not just keeping it like an Escort mission for ALL of that time.

Also: Didn't know Manhunt had the Bricks and Bottles, another minus on originality when it comes to the game-play.


Yeah the story is predictable and lacks layers. Even character driven stories need to have a little more depth to them (unless it's a slice of life of course). Bastion is a pretty good example of this (and why I think it's the better tale). It keeps things simple, but still has a lot of depth to it.


As for Ellie and Joel as characters. I found Joel pretty intriguing and interesting but I would have liked more. Ellie I felt was incredibly boring, but pretty likable.
---
oof