The Last of Us Part II

[ZazuuPriest]

You keep raising this as though it's a catch-all. Genre fiction has fantastical elements, either sword and sorcery, speculative science, whatever. But beyond that direct "buy" the story asks of you, everything else should feel plausible and real within that context. What about an imaginary zombie fungus changes the physiology of otherwise ordinary people? I mean, why can't Ellie just fly? The whole game is unrealistic, right?

so according to you a woman cant naturally be built like abby? thats your play here?

[Stormdash]

so according to you a woman cant naturally be built like abby? thats your play here?

Didn’t even bother to read up thread, naturally. Gotta fly right to the outrage lol.

[Syegfryed]

Apparently you can get the full experience of the game by watching on youtube...im all for game movies like god of war but that was a big too much.

That aside, the story to me is obnoxious in many levels, at least the memes coming up are amazing

[everydaygamer]

So I finally finished the prologue and let me just say it is amazing that it affected me as much as it did despite having been spoiled for me but I need to address two major complaints I've seen people make about Joel's death.

1. "It's out of character that Joel and Tommy let their guards down" - this is a head-scratcher for me because what the hell were they supposed to do? They were in a situation where they had no choice but to trust these strangers and when they did realize something was wrong there was literally nothing they could do to avoid it. What, were they just supposed to start shooting the second they entered the house?

2. "it makes no sense that Abby's group didn't kill Ellie and Tommy" - umm... yes it does, the whole point is that they were only their to kill Joel nothing more, now there were members who were prepared to kill them only for others to stop them. This is obviously meant to get across the point that they aren't just a bunch of bloodthirsty monsters.

So far really enjoying the game but I can already tell I'm probably gonna disagree with some people if the reactions to the prologue are anything to go by.

[Rennadrel]

I think Alanah Pearce's video is pretty insightful and I don't think that anybody literally got paid for a 10/10. I'm sure there are probably examples of "payola" in the video game media but not like people are telling themselves.

What I think you actually see a lot of are people rating it based on what they think the audience should like, and not what they will like. Same as... a certain franchise film released within the last three years.

That wasn't even her best take, this was more on point (linked because the picture is huge for some reason):

https://i.redd.it/kd3aixrpen551.png

[Saltysquidoon]

Professional critics are no different than YTers. Believing that video game critics are paid off is a very one-dimensional, overly cynical and (imo) outright absurd viewpoint. The truth is that people with different opinions exist and rather than accepting this fact, many people simply invent ridiculous conspiracies to explain away divergent scores.

Heartstopping gameplay
God bless naughty dog
Most important videogame story ever told
Greatest video game of all time

That's just a sample platter of the completely real and sincere opinions you can find on the Metacritic 'critic' reviews

It doesn't matter where the pressure is coming from: Intra profession, not that people try and impress their colleagues in real professions; Inter profession be that inducements or fear of censure; Community backlash; or; The weird tribalist internet shit. If you buckle to that pressure then your review isn't worth the paper it's written on, it is just that simple.

I do agree with Ms Pearce that ultimately reviews don't matter (economically) because Johnny normie is so lobotomised by brand loyalty they will pre-order the latest triple-A slop that gets served up no matter what.
I don't agree with her that "5/10 isn't average" and IGN's scores are pretty much always at least a 7 because they only review big games and big games are more likely to be good. That's just absolute nonsense.

It's absolutely a fair point that streamers get paid off to stream and shill games and no one seems to care about that. I'm not personally 12 so I don't watch streams often but this practice needs to be stamped out or the requirements of disclosure should be set at a level where a child could understand they are being advertised too and not receiving a legitimate experience.

[Tech614]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...ords-uk-charts

Sony's fastest selling game of all time in the UK, ahead of Uncharted 4 and Spider-Man. 76% higher launch then the original. Also the biggest launch of the year topping Animal Crossing.

https://twitter.com/BenjiSales/statu...56197976023040

First preliminary indications from retail partners is The Last of Us Part II is outpacing Spider-Man physical sales in the United States

This isn't locked but is what I'm hearing. After what we are seeing in Europe, Spider-Man record of 3.3 million in 3 days will likely fall

Oooooooooooops all those guys that said the sales where gonna bomb and especially the guy with "fallout 4 I mean 76 vibes".

[Tech614]

How many people are buying boxed games in 2020?

If you actually clicked on the link this is answered for you.

What are you gonna do when the PSN digital sales chart for the month comes out? Cause if you honestly think it's not at the top you're living in as fantasy.

The sales numbers in the US also account for digital and will show on the NPD. This straw grasping is getting quite sad my dude.

[everydaygamer]

Heartstopping gameplay
God bless naughty dog
Most important videogame story ever told
Greatest video game of all time

That's just a sample platter of the completely real and sincere opinions you can find on the Metacritic 'critic' reviews

It doesn't matter where the pressure is coming from: Intra profession, not that people try and impress their colleagues in real professions; Inter profession be that inducements or fear of censure; Community backlash; or; The weird tribalist internet shit. If you buckle to that pressure then your review isn't worth the paper it's written on, it is just that simple.

I do agree with Ms Pearce that ultimately reviews don't matter (economically) because Johnny normie is so lobotomised by brand loyalty they will pre-order the latest triple-A slop that gets served up no matter what.
I don't agree with her that "5/10 isn't average" and IGN's scores are pretty much always at least a 7 because they only review big games and big games are more likely to be good. That's just absolute nonsense.

It's absolutely a fair point that streamers get paid off to stream and shill games and no one seems to care about that. I'm not personally 12 so I don't watch streams often but this practice needs to be stamped out or the requirements of disclosure should be set at a level where a child could understand they are being advertised too and not receiving a legitimate experience.

You realize this just boils down to you not agreeing with them right? It doesn't matter how many people agree with you it will never be considered proof that the critics lied about their opinion or were paid off it simply proves that, surprise, people have different opinions.

As for why people don't get upset about streamers, it's because they just get paid to play the game. It's not like they play a special version of the game, it's the same version everyone else plays. The hope is that people watching might get interested but no matter who the streamer playing is they can't make a bad game look good. And even if they didn't get paid to play the game it would still be considered an advertisement no matter what, people streaming Minecraft for fun are all technically advertising it regardless of if money exchanged hands. Even going to a friend's house and watching them play a game is a form of advertisement.

It only become a problem if you advertise a game as something it isn't, a good example is Brutal Legends which came across as a really interesting action-adventure game in both promo's and the demo only for it to turn out that half the game was actually just some crap RTS game and none of that awesome gameplay from the opening hours is in the rest of the game.

[eschatological]

One place I'll defend them here - they could have done that but they probably would only have done it if they were framing it as penance of some kind for TLOU, and - other than lying? - I don't want that. If it was an either/or, and we could only see him die a pointless, ignominious Tasha Yar tier death but make clear that he regrets nothing about saving Ellie? I'd take that over a heroic death trying to make up it or some BS they would have come up with. Hell, I think it's pretty clear in context he understands exactly who these people are and why they want him and I love that his tone shifts immediately to disrespect and dismissal, because that's all the Fireflies deserve on the matter.

- - - Updated - - -



Embrace the power of "and". he can be obviously fucking toast but still clearly advertised that he will be on this adventure. I mean, Boromir, anyone? Or Spock? or (insert literally fin thousands of examples of characters that went through the plot and THEN died).

- - - Updated - - -



I don't see how one can assess 7 years of fandom around the game and think that is the prevailing view, though. I mean, show me one person who saw him appear in the TLOU 2 trailer and sneered "that guy, sure hope he gets his comeuppance". And certainly that's not how that appearance is framed. it's framed for the reactions it did get, lots of "awwww" and "daddy Joel!"

Honestly? My thought when I saw Joel in that first trailer? It was, "Oh, he's back. I thought he'd be so torn up by what he did that he'd become a bitter, cynical mess and just fuck off for eternity, and probably die because he was a mess."

Which is kind of what happened in TLOU2.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a thing people conveniently ignore, of course there is little evidence critics get paid, but there is evidence critcs do get blacklisted if they say the wrong thing. Jim Sterling is an example (as much I don't like him he has always stood up for consumers), TB, rest him, was another guy who got blacklisted by a lot of devs.

I don't know of a single instance of TB being blacklisted. He turned down ad deals constantly, which are different, because ad sponsorships want you to highlight the game in a certain way, and he always had two rules: 1) he would always disclose that the video was sponsored (which is now standard after the Machinima fiasco), and 2) he would only ever give his honest opinion, even if it was a paid ad.

Do you have actual evidence of him being blacklisted for a game review?

[ZazuuPriest]

So I finally finished the prologue and let me just say it is amazing that it affected me as much as it did despite having been spoiled for me but I need to address two major complaints I've seen people make about Joel's death.

1. "It's out of character that Joel and Tommy let their guards down" - this is a head-scratcher for me because what the hell were they supposed to do? They were in a situation where they had no choice but to trust these strangers and when they did realize something was wrong there was literally nothing they could do to avoid it. What, were they just supposed to start shooting the second they entered the house?

2. "it makes no sense that Abby's group didn't kill Ellie and Tommy" - umm... yes it does, the whole point is that they were only their to kill Joel nothing more, now there were members who were prepared to kill them only for others to stop them. This is obviously meant to get across the point that they aren't just a bunch of bloodthirsty monsters.

So far really enjoying the game but I can already tell I'm probably gonna disagree with some people if the reactions to the prologue are anything to go by.

I tend to agree with your points but I think a big criticism of the first point is: would Joel and Tommy have helped Abby in the first place to even put themselves in that position? Maybe after 4 years of relative peace theyve softened up a bit but the players dont get to see that.

In the end haters gonna hate and most of it boils down to the story not matching up with peoples head-cannon or the simple fact that other people exist in the game besides cis white boys. This is not an exaggeration either as most of the negative reviews revolve around people crying that there are lesbians and "buff" women in this game.

[everydaygamer]

How much something money something makes =/= How good it is as a piece of art, or we all agree Fortnite is the best game ever made and the MCU is objectively the best set of films

Well, they are both definitely really good, I don't think you can argue that they don't deserve the praise they get and the money they earn. Maybe not the best ever but that's ultimately a subjective opinion.

[Thereturn]

I didnt play tlou but considering Joel apparantly killed scientists who were just trying to end the pandemic with Ellie being the key to that since shes immune, why is he so liked?

Hes basicly an idiot who cant place a higher goal over his own selfish feels. He damned the world in hope to get some poontang 10 years later.

[Saltysquidoon]

You realize this just boils down to you not agreeing with them right? It doesn't matter how many people agree with you it will never be considered proof that the critics lied about their opinion or were paid off it simply proves that, surprise, people have different opinions.

You should probably watch the videos that otaXephon posted since they're giving context to my comment.

Even in her defence of "games journalists" the Ex-IGN employee says its likely some reviewers write their reviews with a view to either impressing their industry friends or placating their audiences and that IGN first is 'a bit shifty'.

If nothing less then the CEO of EA being caught handing off cartoonish burlap sacks of cash to a journalist is going to convince you that's your business. But frankly, the evidence that something is rotten in the state of games reviews is there if you care to look, I mean the Dorito Pope incident is legendary.

As for why people don't get upset about streamers, it's because they just get paid to play the game. It's not like they play a special version of the game, it's the same version everyone else plays. The hope is that people watching might get interested but no matter who the streamer playing is they can't make a bad game look good. And even if they didn't get paid to play the game it would still be considered an advertisement no matter what, people streaming Minecraft for fun are all technically advertising it regardless of if money exchanged hands. Even going to a friend's house and watching them play a game is a form of advertisement.

It only become a problem if you advertise a game as something it isn't,

1. I was specifically talking about when a streamer is paid by a publisher to play a game and doesn't adequately disclose that to their audience
2. Yes failing to disclose you are advertising a product is a problem. False advertising is very far from the only problem (legal or otherwise) that exists in advertising.

Besides that, my point (again contextualised by the video) was that streamers should be held to a higher standard then they are when it comes to shady backroom deals to shill products on the dodge and not that the standard 'games journalists' are held to should be lowered to that of a streamer.

[crakerjack]

I think the story went over a lot of peoples heads. The story is meant to bring a sense of realism to the game that is often left out in most games involving vengeance. The whole point of the story is to acknowledge that every action has consequences. Regardless of how we justify something, the decisions we make have repercussions. In most video games, we don't see this unfold in a realistic manner. Most of the time the consequence is that the villain gets back at the hero and then the hero, through great lengths, defeats the evil villain. The thing with the TLoU is that there aren't really any villains or heroes. Almost all of the relevant characters in the game have some sort of justification for their actions that isn't good or bad. The story is a clear cut picture of how vengeance works in the real world and most video games fail to make that connection.

[Thereturn]

This is not an exaggeration either as most of the negative reviews revolve around people crying that there are lesbians and "buff" women in this game.

Oh just wait till the BLM crowd figures out there are no african americans in there. Shits gonna hit the fan.

[everydaygamer]

I tend to agree with your points but I think a big criticism of the first point is: would Joel and Tommy have helped Abby in the first place to even put themselves in that position? Maybe after 4 years of relative peace theyve softened up a bit but the players dont get to see that.

That was ultimately how I saw it, after 4 years of living and working with other people I do think they have reached a point wherein the heat of the moment no they aren't gonna leave someone to die if they have an opportunity to help them especially if they have no reason not to (seeing as they didn't even know her).

[GodHunter]

I didnt play tlou but considering Joel apparantly killed scientists who were just trying to end the pandemic with Ellie being the key to that since shes immune, why is he so liked?

Hes basicly an idiot who cant place a higher goal over his own selfish feels. He damned the world in hope to get some poontang 10 years later.

That's where you don't have the sense of feeling towards the character development and relationship between Joel and Ellie from the first game. Joel lost his daughter at the beginning of TLOU. and you feel some sort of empathy towards the end of the game when ellie is about to be sacrificed for the greater good. Like for sure it was a dumb selfish move on his part but at the same time you can see why. She was like a daughter to him.

[eschatological]

Off the top of my head there is Wild Games, I remember him saying something on his podcast about a number of devs not associating with him, but to be frank after flicking through a few I can't find the quote so feel free to disregard that example. Point is it does happen, the Jim Sterling stuff is proof enough of that regardless of how people try to make excuses for devs

Jim Sterling is just a professional troll who invented the Heelsvbaby method of video game commentary. He's outraged for views.

He happens to pick selective things that are justified to be angry about, but his reaction is never warranted, imo. If you don't like predatory microtransactions.....don't buy the game. Video games are a luxury product, they're not a life necessity.

[everydaygamer]

I didnt play tlou but considering Joel apparantly killed scientists who were just trying to end the pandemic with Ellie being the key to that since shes immune, why is he so liked?

Hes basicly an idiot who cant place a higher goal over his own selfish feels. He damned the world in hope to get some poontang 10 years later.

This is the funny thing about looking back on the first game. People go to great lengths to justify Joel's actions after the fact but the reality is no matter how you try to justify it that's not why he did it. Even if there was a guaranteed 100% chance of Ellie's death saving everyone else Joel would have made the same selfish choice because he couldn't bring himself to let go of the girl he now saw as a daughter. Is it understandable? yes. Does that make it right? debatable. But you will find that a lot of people try really hard to paint Joel as the good guy even when the character himself admits he isn't.