The Last of Us: Part II

Another good take on review scores from a recently former IGN employee. Pretty much confirms my original feelings and is why I have to discredit anyone who screams "shill" at any good review they disagree with.

 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
Another good take on review scores from a recently former IGN employee. Pretty much confirms my original feelings and is why I have to discredit anyone who screams "shill" at any good review they disagree with.


Just to play devil's advocate. I never considered journos to be inside the industry, even if they like to think that to boost their ego. You're an insider when you make games, not if you're just talking about games.
Plus it also rubs me the wrong way when someone starts off the bat with their credentials. Your words should speak for themselves, and they do, no need for this "you should believe me because I'm a ......"
 
Just to play devil's advocate. I never considered journos to be inside the industry, even if they like to think that to boost their ego. You're an insider when you make games, not if you're just talking about games.
Plus it also rubs me the wrong way when someone starts off the bat with their credentials. Your words should speak for themselves, and they do, no need for this "you should believe me because I'm a ......"

We're talking about reviews and scores specifically though, not from the game developer/publisher side of it. So for a games journalist/reviewer, she was an insider for IGN, one of the most popular and thus shit-on game reviewers out there. So what is the relevance of being a game developer or insider in that respect?

I don't think her words would have carried the same weight if she didn't disclose her background either, which is hard to do without citing credentials sometimes. It's basically the only reason I watched the video, because I didn't know she even left IGN after hearing her on their podcast not that long ago it seemed like.
 
We're talking about reviews and scores specifically though, not from the game developer/publisher side of it. So for a games journalist/reviewer, she was an insider for IGN, one of the most popular and thus shit-on game reviewers out there. So what is the relevance of being a game developer or insider in that respect?
It's just an observation, doesn't mean I don't agree about the scores.
I always said they stopped giving out lower scores in fear of the fans. Giving out good scores never seemed to be an issue until now.
In the current climate announcing that she worked at IGN more likely means her words would be dismissed immediately. At least by the people this is relevant to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T4rd
like this
In the current climate announcing that she worked at IGN more likely means her words would be dismissed immediately. At least by the people this is relevant to.

Maybe, but IMO they would only be dismissed by those who assume the worst in reviewers and that they're shilling in the first place; i.e. if they don't align with their own opinion, or respect their opinion, then they must have an agenda or are paid off somehow.

Honestly, if you still don't believe her now that she's an independent reviewer, just because she worked at IGN before, then you have to be a pretty sad and distrusting person in general. I'm a skeptical person as well, but I don't assume guilt without a reasonable amount of evidence at least and also try to at least see things from another's prospective before I decide to agree or disagree. This comes back to the biggest character flaw I see in a lot of people in general, esp. now that nearly everything is being politicized; we're way too quick to judge others, while also being unwilling to compromise at all on our own stances. I'll admit even I'm guilty of it, probably even in this thread at one point, but I try to stay diligent at least in keeping myself in check about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
DF's Tech Review


Just watched this. It sums up very well why this is a much better stealth action game than the first (and probably anything else available today). There is just so much detail that makes the gameplay immersive,engaging and enjoyable.
 
This is cool



I was waiting for a video like this to pop up. I've been to Seattle a couple of times, and they nailed a the spots I recognize.
Turns out, they nailed the spots I didn't recognize as well!
 
Just watched this. It sums up very well why this is a much better stealth action game than the first (and probably anything else available today). There is just so much detail that makes the gameplay immersive,engaging and enjoyable.
Right but the main character is one of them capital-L Lesbians.

Yes this is one of those rare games that transcends the medium and takes the artform into the realm of something indistinguishable from magic - it takes you on a journey and makes you feel something. But Ellie strongly dislikes wieners. So on that basis I have to reduce my 10/10 to 3.5/10.

If they can patch a Straight/Gay toggle in the menu options, I'll reinstate my 10/10. Until then, I'll agree with ACG's Review: "Wait for Straight".
 
Last edited:
people like ACG aren't grading it lower because the main character is gay...they are doing so based on the gameplay, story, mechanics etc...too many people are obsessed with the sexual orientation aspect...it's a video game...same with movies...I guess there haven't been many video games with lesbian/transgender main characters so people are going insane
 
https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/the-last-of-us-part-ii

it was 3.5 with about 30k user reviews now 5.0 with almost 110k reviews... this is insane, most games only get couple thousands
Since this game sold about 3x more than any regular AAA game, that means you'd get at least 3x more legitimate reviews. Let's say 30k. So the excess above that is just the entitled people who think they are entitled to get the exact game they wanted, and now entitled to cancel this because it is not exactly what they wanted. All while calling out twitter for cancel culture. If metacritic wants to stay relevant they really need to start requiring proof of purchase for user reviews. At least in the first month after release.
 
people like ACG aren't grading it lower because the main character is gay...they are doing so based on the gameplay, story, mechanics etc...too many people are obsessed with the sexual orientation aspect...it's a video game...same with movies...I guess there haven't been many video games with lesbian/transgender main characters so people are going insane
Yesterday I watched the stream with critical drinker and Az, to try and see the other perspective and what legitimate criticism they have. What can I say I'm an optimist.
They barely touched on the gameplay. It was a turd flinging competition, who can bash the game harder. The only criticism they had for the game that it is a "picking up things" simulator. And there is too much walking. Yeah, what other TPS you know where you don't have to walk or pick up things?
And they criticized it for not being open world enough, only in that one part, but then later admitted they didn't even try and explore that bit.
They also tried to sell one of the most interesting aspects of the game as a negative. That when you kill enemies the others react to it like they are their friends with personal relationships.
Their reaction: I didn't care/what should I do about it. You are not supposed to do anything you dum dum, it is meant to make you think: "perhaps I'm not the white knight I think I am" But that bit clearly went above their heads.
All they managed to prove is that they are both unable to accept lesbians in a game, and that a woman can be buff, because it does not pander to them. They spent at least 20 minutes on that alone,
Hell their chat audience was more open minded than them, and that says a lot (yes I've tried to talk to people in the chat before it devolved to the typical uncontrollable mess)
And they clearly misunderstood or misinterpreted the timeline of the game as well, which they based some story criticism on.
The only actually legitimate story criticism they had I think was: in the scene where ellie kills mel, it is the only scene where mel wears clothes that hides her pregnancy, and they never even try to say don't hurt her she's pregnant.
OK, one more thing, but I already mentioned that myself: The bigot sandwiches part was really cringey to me as well.

The rest however was just their personal bias, like the they are upset about the love triangles in the game WTF, they were never teens? This is the exact shit we were doing back then.
My best friend's girlfriend from last week was my gf for the next week, who is actually another schoolmate's older sister. I thought everyone's teens were similar. It was actually refreshing for me to see teen flames depicted relatively well
Then they dumped on the Weed smoking scene, saying why are they doing this in a zombie apocalypse. News flash the apocalpyse has been going on for 20+ years, you think people should just stop having fun? And then they were the ones criticizing the game for Ellie not being fun for the rest of the game and being a different character than in the first game. I thought being consumed with bloodlust changes you, guess I was wrong
And the only thing they said about Lev and Yara, is that they didn't care about them at allWell mates you are only qualifying yourselves with that statement.
But at least to give credit where it's due: They did say that Lev being trans is not in your face, and barely touched upon in the gamebut somehow they still hated him for no reason, they were so excited to describe the scene where he gets knocked out.

They clearly went into the game wanting to hate it. If my goal was to find reasons to hate something I could, even for my favorite things. The fact that they barely found anything legitimate to criticize shows something.
 
Yesterday I watched the stream with critical drinker and Az, to try and see the other perspective and what legitimate criticism they have. What can I say I'm an optimist.
They barely touched on the gameplay. It was a turd flinging competition, who can bash the game harder. The only criticism they had for the game that it is a "picking up things" simulator. And there is too much walking. Yeah, what other TPS you know where you don't have to walk or pick up things?
And they criticized it for not being open world enough, only in that one part, but then later admitted they didn't even try and explore that bit.
They also tried to sell one of the most interesting aspects of the game as a negative. That when you kill enemies the others react to it like they are their friends with personal relationships.
Their reaction: I didn't care/what should I do about it. You are not supposed to do anything you dum dum, it is meant to make you think: "perhaps I'm not the white knight I think I am" But that bit clearly went above their heads.
All they managed to prove is that they are both unable to accept lesbians in a game, and that a woman can be buff, because it does not pander to them. They spent at least 20 minutes on that alone,
Hell their chat audience was more open minded than them, and that says a lot (yes I've tried to talk to people in the chat before it devolved to the typical uncontrollable mess)
And they clearly misunderstood or misinterpreted the timeline of the game as well, which they based some story criticism on.
where he gets knocked out.

They clearly went into the game wanting to hate it. If my goal was to find reasons to hate something I could, even for my favorite things. The fact that they barely found anything legitimate to criticize shows something.

we're talking about ACG's review here...I don't know why you keep going on this rant about other reviews...maybe because it fits your narrative...ACG's review focuses on the game with legitimate criticisms of the gameplay...but of course you ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative
 
we're talking about ACG's review here...I don't know why you keep going on this rant about other reviews...maybe because it fits your narrative...ACG's review focuses on the game with legitimate criticisms of the gameplay...but of course you ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative
I'm not talking about ACG's review, I didn't watch ACG's review, as I never even saw any of his reviews, so I can't comment on his criticism. But if you really can't let go of it I might try and make time for it sometime later.

My previous comment is completely unrelated to ACG. Don't make it about something it isn't. And don't project. You are the one clearly focused on ACG's review for a week now because it fits the narrative, that the game is not great.

PS: I really hope we are done with the "but it's not perfect" argument.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe someone can be this dense, so I assume you are trolling.
its. not. perfect.
you even said so yourself.
i dont agree therefor i'm dense, a troll, an istaphobe and whatever other garbage you want to try and sling.
 
its. not. perfect.
you even said so yourself.
i dont agree therefor i'm dense, a troll, an istaphobe and whatever other garbage you want to try and sling.
No, you are dense because we established it already that it is not perfect, yet you keep straw manning us with it.
 
No, you are dense because we established it already that it is not perfect, yet you keep straw manning us with it.

so you didnt want a responce to your " PS: I really hope we are done with the "but it's not perfect" argument. "

Can I just say again that I totally fucking called the insane controversy before it even came out?
it was already there before you made your comment about "stop liking what i dont like" which my argument has never been about.
 
ACG's review focuses on the game with legitimate criticisms of the gameplay...but of course you ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative
So just to make you happy I'm going through ACG's review and see what are those damning criticisms.

  1. It's not open world - Was it advertised as such? I don't think so. I'm personally sick and tired of the empty open worlds where you run around aimlessly for hours. What little openness the game has is just enough to make you explore. And seeing that most people didn't take the time to explore even what is available, I think the creators struck the right balance. His preference is more open games, I respect that but I don't concur, this definitely doesn't make the game bad.
  2. Conveniently set up covers for some encounters - His problem: There are some furniture set up in the game world which is convenient to be used as cover. I always assumed anything like this was set up by previous occupants of the buildings to defend it from invaders, just as the barricaded doors. Therefore this criticism is completely invalid.
  3. 30 fps - I mean it is what it is. It's a technical limitation. Again this is personal preference. I prefer better graphics with less FPS, always did. I used to play F1GP2 with the graphics set to target 19fps. So this doesn't make the game bad either.FPS was pretty solid all the way. Only once or twice I noticed a small drop in fps in more open areas, but not on a level that would affect gameplay.
  4. Time jumps back and forth? - I really don't get what is he going on about here. The only non linear jump in the game is that you play the same 3 days with two different characters, after each other, that's it, nothing else. The flashbacks cannot be considered as time jumps they are more like intermissions between acts to change up the pace and prevent you from becoming bored by the action, and it worked great for me.
  5. Mediocre AI - This is just baffling to me, as I found the AI to be extremely nasty and effective in the game. I had to reduce AI difficulty otherwise they worked so well together that I couldn't get from A To B. There were a few particular levels with a lot of clickers and those commando infected which is a new enemy type those were the most insane encounters of my life, it was scary and thrilling at the same time. The humans can completely divert from their patrol routes and will go to investigate any noise, and often search for you in a flanking pattern.
  6. Lack of new enemy types - This is just plain wrong. There is at least 3 new types of infected in the game, or two if I don't include the boss enemy. Plus there are numerous different types of human enemies, each utilizing different weapons and strategies.
  7. Too long and boring - This is again one of those personal preference things, I really can't put my head around how can someone be bored with this game. I barely could put it down to go to sleep, it never felt boring, I constantly craved for more until it ended.
  8. The interruptions of the gameplay is bad? - WTF This seems to be in direct conflict with the previous criticism. The fact that the game constantly switched between story telling, action and exploration is what made it not boring in the first place. If I had to do all the action without interruption I'm sure would've been bored. My only complaint to the structure of the game is that I'd have switched between the two main characters more often, not just once.
  9. Not subtle enough - This is rich considering some details completely went over his head. I don't want to call him a sociopath but he sure sounded like that when he said he enjoys seeing the fear on the faces of his kills and their partners. They weren't implemented to feed your bloodlust, geez. It was meant to humanize the enemy and make you feel less of a righteous white knight while killing them. I can understand someone disliking the story when the entire moral of the game flies above their head.
  10. Then he goes on a random rant about the upgrade system, which is basically the same as in the first game. And I already said it then and there that it is the best damn crafting / upgrade system there is.
  11. Mention Abby is the hulk. - Oh yeah I thought it would never come. It seems most youtube gamers really can't cope with this.
  12. You can't stealth with Abby - Again plain wrong. you can stealth just as well, the only difference is that you don't stab enemies during stealth but choke them. And you have to craft shivs with Abby to be able to stealth kill clickers, while Ellie can do it with her knife. That's the only actual meaningful difference. Apart from this both characters can be played exactly the same way.
  13. Autoaim issues - Didn't use it, can't comment on it.
  14. Another rant about the action being too varied - With stealth, fist fights, melee encounters, short and long range weapons, and throwables, This is really a strange backhanded criticism, that I don't get. He says it could've been worse. But never actually says why is this bad in the first place.
  15. Bad ally AI - His criticism: The enemy AI cannot see your ally when you're in stealth. Dude, this is game design 101. You never want your ai teammate to be able to break your stealth. This is how it is in every freaking stealth game I ever played. Sure it's a bit immersion breaking when the ai is clearly in the open, but this does not happen as often as he suggests. Most of the time the AI will keep close to you and try to imitate hiding. It is a thousand billion times better than getting busted because of your ally. In a game where stealth is already difficult enough.
  16. The AI can bump you out of cover - Yes this does happens a few times but not many, I noticed this 3x in the entire 25 hours game, and only once I was busted because of it. If this is annoying you imagine how annoying it would be if you could get busted through the AI getting seen!
  17. Some things are handled in a "low budget way" - Since he never mentions what are these things I can't do anything but dismiss this criticism.
  18. The game flounders when not telling the story - Again this is meaningless to me as I don't know what he means by it. He even acknowledges that the gameplay is better than in the first, so what gives?
  19. Too much filler content - I don't know what does he mean by filler. If anything I felt the ending was too short, not too long. I was sad when it actually ended and not just due to the story.
After all that fanfare and touting this review I expected more irrefutable criticism from it.
 
Last edited:
So just to make you happy I'm going through ACG's review and see what are those damning criticisms.

again stop trying to force your opinion of games onto others...ACG is posting his impressions of the game...you may not agree...no need to refute every point of his as though he is wrong and you are right
 
again stop trying to force your opinion of games onto others...ACG is posting his impressions of the game...you may not agree...no need to refute every point of his as though he is wrong and you are right
First your problem was that I disregard it, now that I refute most of it: STOP DOING THAT!
I only said he is wrong where he is obviously and factually mistaken. About the rest I only said that it is a case of personal preference and not something that make the game objectively bad.
Did you even read what I've written?

If you didn't want me to go through it then what did you want? You've been bringing it up since it came out. Should we just accept it as the ultimate truth and adjust our opinion of the game to it? I don't get it.
 
it was already there before you made your comment about "stop liking what i dont like" which my argument has never been about.

I wasn't referring to you at all, I'm talking about the big picture. I predicted well before the game came out that it would become a lightning rod for controversy, and BTW it had nothing to do with the leaks, which I avoided like the plague. In my opinion there is a "zeitgeist" of the gaming world and if you watch various trends within that world, as well as things extraneous to that world (current political happenings, world events, etc) you can, to some extent, figure out where things might be headed.

In my opinion too many people get caught up in the zeitgeist and lose objectivity. That's all I'm saying.
 
I'm playing as Abby, and she
just saved Lev, and returned to the Aquarium,
I saved it right there and quit for work.

The seraphytes and Wolves kind of reminded me of the movie "Doomsday." Just a little though.
In that movies, two warring factions live in similar conditions. One lives in a castle and lives "old world style;" the other group doesn't.
That's about where those similarities end.

The creators said last game took inspiration from The Road, I wonder what all inspired this game.
 
Even though it's pretty obvious, I think this one drew a lot from the Walking Dead. When TLoU2 was being developed into a mostly finished game, the Walking Dead was on top of the world. It feels like that was forever ago, but it was only 2 years ago. I had a fair amount of Walking Dead deja vu with TLoU, almost all of it positive.
 
Even though it's pretty obvious, I think this one drew a lot from the Walking Dead. When TLoU2 was being developed into a mostly finished game, the Walking Dead was on top of the world. It feels like that was forever ago, but it was only 2 years ago. I had a fair amount of Walking Dead deja vu with TLoU, almost all of it positive.
I only have PTSD about the walking dead :D It was all downhill after the first season. Surprised I lasted til season 5, when I finally pulled the plug after a random awful episode.
 
The seraphytes and Wolves kind of reminded me of the movie "Doomsday." Just a little though.
In that movies, two warring factions live in similar conditions. One lives in a castle and lives "old world style;" the other group doesn't.
That's about where those similarities end.
Which Doomsday are you talking about? I only know about the 2008 one with Rhona Mitra and Malcolm Mcdowel, but I remember nothing about the plot of that movie. Just that it had another strong female lead that I loved, plus Mcdowel is one of my favorite character actors.
 
Which Doomsday are you talking about? I only know about the 2008 one with Rhona Mitra and Malcolm Mcdowel, but I remember nothing about the plot of that movie. Just that it had another strong female lead that I loved, plus Mcdowel is one of my favorite character actors.


That's the one.

I haven't watched it for quite a while, but I do remember a group living in a castle and they live medieval style, and the other group was in a bunker/warehouse and very Mad Max inspired.

Anyway, in this game, both factions are cults, one just identifies as a cult, the other is in denial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
I got the urge to render some fanart.

abs.jpg

After going through 13 iterations I got the look pretty close.
 
I only have PTSD about the walking dead :D It was all downhill after the first season. Surprised I lasted til season 5, when I finally pulled the plug after a random awful episode.

I bailed after a couple episodes into Season 8. The prior era was actually really good. A lot of the early episodes with the Saviors before they introduced Negan were pretty amazing TV. The show fell off a cliff not long after Negan showed up and it eventually became unwatchable after that story-arch was completed. They spent a full year building up to it and there was so much filler that ruined any mystique any characters had.
Anyway, the various factions in the Walking Dead (Woodbury, Terminus, Scavengers, Saviors, Wolves, etc.) clearly influenced TLoU2. The show and comics likely influenced the first game, too. Probably less so since the show wasn't as far and there were fewer similarities at the time.

I'm seriously thinking about starting up a NG+ run this week. So many cool moments I want to re-experience. Hopefully the slower stuff doesn't feel like a slog. Uncharted 4 is kind of a chore to replay. You know what's going to happen and the "cut scenes" aren't really cut scenes, so you can't skip 'em.
 
Woah, that's badass! Did you really create that?! It looks incredible! I mean I don't really appreciate Abby, but the work itself looks very well done!
Thanks. It is more a praise of the tools I used than my talent. It's done in Daz Studio.
 
He lost me at "Naughty Dog was deceptive with trailers." That's such a stupid take I keep seeing out there... like they were obviously trying not to give away anything, and by doing it that way they avoided people putting two and two together if Joel was nowhere to be found in gameplay and all that.

edit: Thinking back, I'm pretty sure I made a post in this very thread back when the "you think I'd let you do this without me?" Joel trailer dropped where I pointed out that the animations and stuff of that scene looked off and put-together specifically for a trailer. I mean... it's not rocket appliances, people.
 
From the same guy who I posted way before the game launched and I thought had some valid concerns about the game, he has a pretty interesting take on it, though I personally liked Abby much more than he ended up liking her. I've been waiting for this vid from him as well.
Quite frankly at the end of TLOU when Joel outright lied to Ellie I've lost all respect for him, that was just a cowardly and selfish move. Besides thanks to the segment where Ellie is fighting alone against the cannibals, I was more attached to Elle to begin with.
As for TLOU2 I admit I can't see the game objectively.
Ever since the trailer they revealed Abby in, I was hoping that she'll be a player character, I didn't care about anything else.

So when you first take control of her in the winter, I knew that my prayers were answered. I couldn't wait for the Ellie part to be over and finally get what I've been waiting for all these years. Not that I disliked the Ellie bit, I enjoyed it very much and didn't rush it at all.
I think they could've told any story I'd have been happy as long as I got to play as Abby.

But then it turned out that Abby was actually well written character, but most people were still licking their wounds about Joel at this point and didn't want to hear anything about Abby. So I think think the accusations of bad writing are only a manifestation of the hate they felt for the death of Joel. I'm not saying that's not a valid position to have, just makes them just as biased about the game as I am. They can't admit that it does anything well, while I can't fault it for anything it does clumsily.

The video mentions that it's stupid that actions should have consequences in a vg. I've been complaining about this exact thing (that actions, especially killing should have more weight) he thinks is stupid for years, in the context of multiple games. I always want games to have the option of non-lethal takedowns for this exact reason. I don't know how many game reviews have I Brought this up in, but not one and not two.

So all in all, TLOU2 gave me the character to play I always wanted, and gave me a version of the story concept I was contemplating for 7 years. Precisely since TLOU. Is it surprising that I think it's the best thing since sliced bread?

Meanwhile I improved my reproduction of Abby.
ino2.jpg
ino1.jpg
 
Last edited:
If a game is going to have non-lethal takedowns, they should make enemies wake up at random. People can wake up from chokes pretty quickly depending on the variety of hold used and how long it's applied. Sometimes they're "with it" and other times they don't even remember the few minutes prior. On the other side of that coin, sometimes people can stay out for long periods of time or can die if it's held too long.
I'd much rather see the whole neck snap thing go away. That's like the movie/video-game equivalent of shoving someone's nose into their brain with a punch.
It's possible, but it's basically 1 in a million odds and isolated to cases like Francis Ngannou vs. a child.
I'm okay with just keeping things in a fantasy realm where neck breaks are a thing and people can kill hundreds of foes but still have emotion at random.
 
Back
Top