The Last of Us Part II

[Stormdash]

I doubt I'll convince you otherwise but The Hunt's trailer doesn't even include the MC and the movie itself doesn't really settle on the MC for the first twenty minutes anyway. I get that TLoU2 is a sequel so there's a bit of a vested interest in the character of Joel but I don't really think it's that far off... especially since you're making this inane argument that game trailers cannot subvert expectations when "muh feelings" are involved. What TLoU2 did is pretty bold but it was clear even before the leaks that this game was going to be focusing on a very different story from the first one. It's fine if you didn't like it -- I'm still floating my personal feelings about it -- but to say the trailer is "false advertising" or other pointless nonsense is just redirecting a very fundamental irritation that there may exist people who like things you don't like.

Dafuq you talking about? Gilpin is all over that trailer?

[Gorsameth]

I actually got through the game and in just three bursts of playing at that. They've spent 7 years making a game that almost reached the The Order 1886 category of duration.

There is zero context and the reason why there is zero context is because the entire context for what you're doing the entire game gets thrown out of the window at least twice. I played through the entire game with one purpose behind everything I did and then when I finally reach the finish line the character gives up and gets "enlightened"; it's like realizing that books are worth something after burning down the great libraries of Alexandria.

The only context that the game ends up providing is that in order to play guitar you need a good teacher and preferably two fists full of fingers.

On the other hand you can say the moral of the story is that you should always make sure that if you kill someone you kill everyone around them aswell and not show mercy because if you don't someone will come to kill you.

Donno if they were going for that message...

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I actually got through the game and in just three bursts of playing at that. They've spent 7 years making a game that almost reached the The Order 1886 category of duration.

There is zero context and the reason why there is zero context is because the entire context for what you're doing the entire game gets thrown out of the window at least twice. I played through the entire game with one purpose behind everything I did and then when I finally reach the finish line the character gives up and gets "enlightened"; it's like realizing that books are worth something after burning down the great libraries of Alexandria.

The only context that the game ends up providing is that in order to play guitar you need a good teacher and preferably two fists full of fingers.

Again the story content alone proves that it’s not a short game nebulous statements like you beating it in three sitting mean nothing.

The story isn’t about you what ever reason you played the game doesn’t have any baring on any of the story as this isn’t a choice making game. You ignoring the context shown multiple times through out the game as to why the ending happens doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist it just means your to bias to register it.

[Magnagarde]

Sorry, but if someone watched the stream from beginning to the end of the game, and gives a rating for the story (not gameplay), his rating is 100% valid. No matter what, you are wrong. There is no difference to the story whether you watched it from start to end or played it yourself.

Didn't give a rating on any portal, just watched several streams. Glad I didn't buy the game.

It actually feels worse when you play through it.

- - - Updated - - -

Again the story content alone proves that it’s not a short game nebulous statements like you beating it in three sitting mean nothing.

The story isn’t about you what ever reason you played the game doesn’t have any baring on any of the story as this isn’t a choice making game. You ignoring the context shown multiple times through out the game as to why the ending happens doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist it just means your to bias to register it.

I'm biased in what way exactly and over what? This is the problem right here; players show they dislike the game and rate it accordingly, only to call it a biased or bot review. What bias is there exactly?

The story content could be a hundred years long, but if it was equally shit it would still be shit and worthy of being rated accordingly.

Having a lot of pointless actions throughout a game that serve no purpose other than to teach you how you were wrong to do what the game expected you to do is not a good story.

[Relapses]

Dafuq you talking about? Gilpin is all over that trailer?

She's in the trailer but it isn't really implied that she is the MC. I went into the movie having only seen the trailer so I was (pleasantly) surprised when she ended up being the central character of the story. I had heard it was a bit of a political satire but coming from Lindelof I expected a distinct left slant on the film which it very clearly didn't have. It roasts both sides of the political spectrum and really leaves the ball in the viewers' court as to how to interpret it. I think the overall point of the film shares a lot in common with TLoU's more salient broad strokes: People fucking suck.

[Stormdash]

She's in the trailer but it isn't really implied that she is the MC. I went into the movie having only seen the trailer so I was (pleasantly) surprised when she ended up being the central character of the story. I had heard it was a bit of a political satire but coming from Lindelof I expected a distinct left slant on the film which it very clearly wasn't.

I dunno, I'll admit maybe I was primed for it by surrounding media and knowing she was the lead but I can't watch that trailer and not comprehend that Betty Gilpin's character is central - she's the one in a conversational face-off with the biggest name actor in the movie after all.

[Magnagarde]

On the other hand you can say the moral of the story is that you should always make sure that if you kill someone you kill everyone around them aswell and not show mercy because if you don't someone will come to kill you.

Donno if they were going for that message...

It's kinda ironic, but that's one of the takeaways from a game which is I suppose(?) meant to show that revenge and killing are bad.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I'm biased in what way exactly and over what? This is the problem right here; players show they dislike the game and rate it accordingly, only to call it a biased or bot review. What bias is there exactly?

The story content could be a hundred years long, but if it was equally shit it would still be shit and worthy of being rated accordingly.

Having a lot of pointless actions throughout a game that serve no purpose other than to teach you how you were wrong to do what the game expected you to do is not a good story.

Bias in favour of hating Abbie and wanting revenge because of how you feel about Joel and ellie and thinking that because you want something that means the story should do it. To say there is no context to that Leeds to the ending puts that bias on full display as you have to actively dismiss what the game shows you for such a claim.

[Relapses]

Sorry, but if someone watched the stream from beginning to the end of the game, and gives a rating for the story (not gameplay), his rating is 100% valid. No matter what, you are wrong. There is no difference to the story whether you watched it from start to end or played it yourself.

Didn't give a rating on any portal, just watched several streams. Glad I didn't buy the game.

I wouldn't take a movie review seriously from somebody who openly admits they walked out after the first ten minutes. It's fine if you do -- that's your choice; but a bunch of people who haven't played a fucking game giving a game they haven't played a bad score then coming onto internet forums to defend their opinions is, in my opinion, the very definition of the worst parts of mob mentality.

- - - Updated - - -

she's the one in a conversational face-off with the biggest name actor in the movie after all.

You don't even find out who her character is until the final act begins. She's literally shown faceless in the movie up until that point. Granted, if I was less of an idiot I probably would have figured it out earlier but I think the trailer did a pretty good job of setting up one thing then being something else.

[Jastall]

This kind of trickery is present in movie trailers and rarely do people throw shit fits over it. It's really not a big deal to anybody other than the extremely incensed vocal minority you see on forums like this.

There's even a trope for that!

Anyway, the same people would complain about spoilers instead had the trailers been truthful. I'm not saying the story is good, but it is another non-argument.

[Magnagarde]

Bias in favour of hating Abbie and wanting revenge because of how you feel about Joel and ellie and thinking that because you want something that means the story should do it. To say there is no context to that Leeds to the ending puts that bias on full display as you have to actively dismiss what the game shows you for such a claim.

"Bias in favour of hating Abby"

That's the whole point why the story is shit; the story does everything to make the player hate Abby and then subverts expectations, without a senseful resolution and explanation as to why Abby wasn't killed too, when the entire game is spent going through a hitlist with Abby's name stamped in capital letters as top priority. It also makes you play as Abby and then steers you into once again playing with the sole purpose of killing Abby. I won't even go into the fact that they leave eachother almost dead on a couple of occasions, including the ending, just so the story can continue the way it was envisioned - with no vision that is.

There is absolutely zero context; the story isn't able to string two pieces together, plays on drama and shock value with zero purpose. This is not about me wanting a story where we end up killing Abby simply because I want it; this is me wanting a story where we don't spend the game progressing the story and characters in a way where more than half the game is spent doing something that ends up having zero purpose.

You spend the entire game going through a list of people to kill in order to get revenge, only to stop at the very ending because the revelation about killing supposedly lands on top of your head as subtle as a sledgehammer. The lesson here is that players have the right to not like a story like this and they have the right to rate it accordingly, without being categorized as bots or review bombers that came out of the blue.

"Oh wow, maybe this whole killing and revenge business isn't as noble and good. I'll stop with it now, I killed a hundred people to kill this one, but I'll stop at this one."

[Relapses]

There's even a trope for that!

Oh god damnit, here goes another 3 hours of my life...

[Jastall]

Oh god damnit, here goes another 3 hours of my life...

Not even sorry . Man the list for movies is particularly long too.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

"Bias in favour of hating Abby"

That's the whole point why the story is shit; the story does everything to make the player hate Abbie and then subverts expectations, without a senseful resolution and explanation as to why Abbie wasn't killed too, when the entire game is spent going through a hitlist with Abbie's name stamped in capital letters as top priority. It also makes you play as Abbie and then steers you into once again playing with the sole purpose of killing Abbie. I won't even go into the fact that they leave eachother almost dead on a couple of occasions, including the ending, just so the story can continue the way it was envisioned - with no vision that is.

There is absolutely zero context; the story isn't able to string two pieces together, plays on drama and shock value with zero purpose. This is not about me wanting a story where we end up killing Abbie simply because I want it; this is me wanting a story where we don't spend the game progressing the story and characters in a way where more than half the game is spent doing something that ends up having zero purpose.

You spend the entire game going through a list of people to kill in order to get revenge, only to stop at the very ending because the revelation about killing supposedly lands on top of your head as subtle as a sledgehammer.

"Oh wow, maybe this whole killing and revenge business isn't as noble and good. I'll stop with it now, I killed a hundred people to kill this one, but I'll stop at this one."

The game has a single part to make you hate Abbie and it plays off the same feelings ellie has it shows a character you both care for being killed but past that Abbie is only shown in as any other person dealing with her own social circles struggling with who she wants to be and how she wants to interact with the people around her. You don’t spend her parts of the game kicking puppies and murdering kids The game does all of one act to make you hate Abbie and in your bias towards ellie and Joel you blow that up to the story doing every thing to make you hate her.

The game also shows you why you ellie doesn’t kill Abbie this is the context that is though out all of the game and you are ignoring. But the game isn’t about you ellie doesn’t ignore how the events effect her just because you do the game hits you again and again with how ellie is feeling through out her hunt and how it’s effecting her state of mind all of these different parts of the story lead directly Into the ending all of theses parts are the context you think doesn’t exist.

[Sefer]

I wouldn't take a movie review seriously from somebody who openly admits they walked out after the first ten minutes. It's fine if you do -- that's your choice; but a bunch of people who haven't played a fucking game giving a game they haven't played a bad score then coming onto internet forums to defend their opinions is, in my opinion, the very definition of the worst parts of mob mentality.

That's a totally different story and I am with you there. But not in case someone watched the whole story from beginning to end. EDIT: This means no matter he watched it in a cinema or at home... maybe even through a stream. With gameplay involved from someone else. The story is hardwritten.

[Relapses]

That's a totally different story and I am with you there. But not in case someone watched the whole story from beginning to end. EDIT: This means no matter he watched it in a cinema or at home... maybe even through a stream. With gameplay involved from someone else. The story is hardwritten.

Just throwing it out there, there's a fundamental difference between watching a stream, deciding a game isn't for you based off of something you see on the stream then not purchasing the game and what I'm against. I'm not against people coming onto forums and expressing their dissatisfaction here. It's when you take that dissatisfaction and transcribe onto a "review," I think you are deceiving anybody who is looking for a thorough critical analysis which most people expect when they read a review. (Well, maybe not the "User Reviews" section of Metacritic but that's more a Metacritic problem than it is a game reviewing problem.) I really don't see how you can defend people reviewing a product who openly admit to never experiencing it firsthand.

[Tech614]

The game also shows you why you ellie doesn’t kill Abbie this is the context that is though out all of the game and you are ignoring.

It probably flew over most people's heads that Ellie's ending with Abby was symbolism from the first time she killed someone, Joel was being drowned similar to how she is drowning Abby and in that moment she realizes she won and Abby's death won't change anything or make her feel any better. In fact fans of Ellie should appreciate it more then fans of Abby since it shows Ellie was finally able to move past revenge on her own, Abby needed Lev to get past it.

[Sefer]

Just throwing it out there, there's a fundamental difference between watching a stream, deciding a game isn't for you based off of something you see on the stream then not purchasing the game and what I'm against. I'm not against people coming onto forums and expressing their dissatisfaction here. It's when you take that dissatisfaction and transcribe onto a "review," I think you are deceiving anybody who is looking for a thorough critical analysis which most people expect when they read a review. (Well, maybe not the "User Reviews" section of Metacritic but that's more a Metacritic problem than it is a game reviewing problem.) I really don't see how you can defend people reviewing a product who openly admit to never experiencing it firsthand.

I am defending people who wrote a review based on the story while experiencing the story without playing the game (so not bought by themselves) but watching a stream, fully. There is no freaking difference in the story no matter whether you bought and played it or watched a stream. The story is hard written and will no change no matter the circumstances. Prove me wrong, this is a fact. This mean for you that the review wouldn't be different.

As I said I am on your side if this isn't the case.

EDIT: I just quoted you because it sounded like you are not allowed to write a review based on the story if you didn't buy the game. But if you experienced the story through other means the outcome is the same. You simply cannot change that fact.

[Stormdash]

You don't even find out who her character is until the final act begins. She's literally shown faceless in the movie up until that point. Granted, if I was less of an idiot I probably would have figured it out earlier but I think the trailer did a pretty good job of setting up one thing then being something else.

By this argument, Ed Norton's not the main character of Fight Club, going entirely unnamed.

[Relapses]

I am defending people who wrote a review based on the story while experiencing the story without playing the game (so not bought by themselves) but watching a stream, fully. There is no freaking difference in the story no matter whether you bought and played it or watched a stream. The story is hard written and will no change no matter the circumstances. Prove me wrong, this is a fact. This mean for you that the review wouldn't be different.

As I said I am on your side if this isn't the case.

Unlike movies, video games are far more than story. TLoU2 is a very narrative focused game but it's extremely disingenuous to pretend that story is the only factor that matters when reviewing a game. Perhaps it means more to some than others -- and that's fine if it does -- but it still reeks of sensationalism when you're trying to defend people shitting on a product for one single piece of a much broader picture. To give an example, I really didn't care for TLoU2's story. I felt it was mostly one-dimensional and it tried way too hard to drive home a point that was brutally apparent pretty much from the beginning. But the rest of the game was immaculate and some of the best we've ever seen. I personally think it'd be wrong of me to rate the game below mediocre when so much of it is extremely well designed, well acted and well developed. People are free to have dissenting opinions and say that story matters more than anything else but I really think it's a disservice to other people to pretend that this is some universally accepted fact and anybody who disagrees is simply shilling for ND.

- - - Updated - - -

By this argument, Ed Norton's not the main character of Fight Club, going entirely unnamed.

Since we're talking trailers, Fight Club's theatrical trailer is an almost beat-for-beat recreation of the movie, even ending with a snippet of The Pixies' Where Is My Mind? -- minus the big reveal. And, unsurprisingly, just like The Hunt, it was met with lukewarm results at the box office. (Though it has rightfully achieved cult status since.) I suppose the greater irony here is that the films we're discussing had trailers which subverted expectations and were subsequently unsuccessful whereas TLoU2 has a trailer that subverted expectations and by all accounts seems to be a financial success. /shrug