The Last of Us II - 60 fps PS5 patch out now

Captain Kinopio wrote:. Just felt to me like the assumption was that this was a worthy inclusion because it raised trans issues rather than actually being an interesting or impactful angle on the story.

Bookmarking this for... Thoughts once I'm done

I think I’ve almost hit bingo

Hey, I'm still enjoying it. Annoying you lot is just an added bonus

What we wouldn't give for a non violent, cult like gathering that springs from extreme crisis in an incredibly hostile world and just does something different.

It's always the killing and intolerance of others of any kind and unquestioning obedience of mythical or messianic figures.

:roll:

jiggles wrote:I think I’ve almost hit bingo

What we really need is Maf to play it.

Imagine his intellectual vastness directed towards such myriad obvious flaws. With his unique blend of fairness and balanced opinion delivery.
:msgreen:

C'mon Maf. I'll buy you black ops cold war if you do.

Denster wrote:What we wouldn't give for a non violent, cult like gathering that springs from extreme crisis in an incredibly hostile world and just does something different.

It's always the killing and intolerance of others of any kind and unquestioning obedience of mythical or messianic figures.

So this is a weird bit of feedback as it's not actually engaging with my opinion of this aspect of the game. The Scars are cliche, pretty much every post apocalyptic fiction has a religious death cult in there somewhere, but this response isnt responding to that at all. It creates a new premise, the idea of a happy religious death cult, and criticises that instead. It's the same thing you see a lot of right wing pundits doing in the States at the moment: they don't go after the positioning of those on the left, rather they create an imagined position and skewer that instead.

I've gone out of my way to say how much I'm enjoying the game as a whole, which I continue to do. Yet bad-faith responses like the above continue, suggesting the only acceptable reaction to the game is no-holds-barred positivity and acceptance. It's like engaging with the concepts and ideas it presents is somehow a bad thing?

Thats an incredible reach.
Even for you.
But carry on playing. Its deeply enjoyable.

Also. Your thoughts on the museum section?

And that's the typical response: a deflection non-response that relies on personal/institutional comment rather than the actual content of the criticism. If you think it's far reaching I'd like to know why.

And I've already mentioned what I thought of the museum, it gave me shivers. I loved it.

Thanks. I missed that. I loved it too. :wub:

Please dont confuse my love for the game as myopic belligerent defence - it isnt.
You raise a lot of interesting points and they are worthy of debate but some of your criticisms do seem a littlle finicky (to be generous)₩.
Its a survival horror game. Its going to use a lot of videogame tropes which i prefer to use rather than cliche.
I mocked your use of cliche because i dont see how they could have done it differently to your satisfaction.
They use graffiti,0 rumour, iconography - clues of all kinds that hint at what the scars represent and what they become. The scars are sinister and deadly foes with a great hook -the whistling is bloody unnerving. Theyre set up well and they work great as new antagonists.

Im not following this to leap on everything you say and i dont appreciate the bad faith comment. I apologise if thats the impression i gave. Im actually thrilled you got past your reservations to play it.
Ive said so in here and in private to you. If you dont like it as much as me or for the same reasons?
So what.
At least you have played it.

I was really asking why you thought my initial response was a stretch rather than asking your opinion on my opinion of the game, but that's fine.

Its a survival horror game. Its going to use a lot of videogame tropes which i prefer to use rather than cliche.

I think this is the crux of your argument here and it's a fundamental difference of vision I think. I actually find this a little sad, like sad sad, not pathetic sad, as I think we should always expect the most from the things we love. I don't want to read tropey science fiction about a Plucky Rebellion overcoming a Dark Empire, I want to read about two opposing time assassins slowly falling in love across a millenium , or a silicon valley executive flung 10 000 years into the future to do battle with the crystalline Empress of Forever.

Look at Dark Souls. It took the swords and sorcery genre and gave it a new lick of paint, melding western fantasy with Japanese folklore. Or even Resident Evil 4, that moved away from the pulpy Romero based earlier games and introduced an insane Spanish aristocrat and a bunch of parasitic insects.

ND had unlimited funds and an apparently unlimited human resource pool to create their new game. They had set a bunch of rules with their first entry in the series, but that shouldn't have hamstrung them from doing interesting things. I don't think pointing out how they fell back to relying on tired cliches of the genre is worthy of mockery, nor do I think it's an unreasonable point to make.

Thats fair enough but im not sure how fair it is to say they're falling back on tired cliches of the genre.
Maybel i just dont mind their use because its in service to a story thats bold and ambitious with great characters in a stunningly realised world.
Its what we each attach importance to i suppose.
Maybe youre being too critical. Applying far too exacting standards or expectations to it. Or maybe i am too defensive in my love of it and not seeing the flaws you see.

Isnt that a good thing, though?
Its very subjective.

On a positive note. I might not agree with some point but i do enjoy your analysis. Its a cool journey to go through it this way.

I like your views on Abby too. I approached that section with trepidation as i hated her. Yet slowly but surely got drawn into her arc and i think my initial resistance actually made my transition to really liking her ( and rooting for her) all the more satisfying.
Shes great.

On a meta-level, I think it’s an achievement in itself that the game’s critique tends to centre around character motivation and deeper storywriting points like use of tropes rather than “this level sucked”, “the story is stupid” or whatever.

It’s being legitimately evaluated and contrasted more as a work of fiction than simply as a blockbuster game. What a time to be alive.

That's true I suppose. The level of polish on display here is just unreal: this is an action game studio with decades of experience working at the top of their game. BBBUUUUUTTTT with this then comes the discussion of how many lives were ruined/disrupted to make it, and whether the ends justify the means but that's for later.

It's an excellent game. I don't think it's a great story so far.

Ill take that all day long.

Tafdolphin wrote:That's true I suppose. The level of polish on display here is just unreal: this is an action game studio with decades of experience working at the top of their game. BBBUUUUUTTTT with this then comes the discussion of how many lives were ruined/disrupted to make it, and whether the ends justify the means but that's for later.

It's an excellent game. I don't think it's a great story so far.

I'm still yet to play this so have only been skimming bits of this thread and your recent thoughts but I think this comment in particular is interesting.

I found the original to be a very well told story (even if it admittedly followed a well trodden path) but as a game it was merely okay. I'm not sure the gameplay being better and the story being worse would be a trade that would have me interested in playing the sequel!

Tafdolphin wrote:It's an excellent game. I don't think it's a great story so far.

So the opposite of the first?

Edit: what Jenuall said :lol:

Last edited by Tafdolphin on Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yeah that tracks. The combat is pretty much unchanged from the first but the new animation system makes everything feel that much better. They've also nailed the rhythm of the thing: it's predictable ("Oh this is an exploration section." "Ooops, best get ready for some combat here!") but well done. Just as you're getting fed up with exploration they'll throw some enemies at you.

I do wish they'd expanded some of their pillars, like I say I'd have liked a greater reliance on combat arena domination through traps and environmental interactions, but it's still extremely enjoyable to play.

Alternatively, the story of the first took the tropes of the genre and...twisted them ever so slightly. It's not zombies its fungus guys. You're not a plucky survivor you're...the bad guy, essentially. It was grounded in an excellently written relationship between the two main characters that held everything together.

Here they've gotten away from themselves and have tried to create a parable of sorts, a treatise on the human condition. It's a valid point, but it's also singular and although the player is aware of what the narrative is saying the characters remain blissfully unaware. That disconnect grates, especially over 20 hours.

The combat is massively different. With far greater variety and much more bloody difficult foes.

Those bastard Stalkers for starters.

The Last of Us II - 60 fps PS5 patch out now

Who is online

Affiliates