TLOU2 Review Thread

[CriticalGaming]

Let's not dwell too much on her appearance, there's much more interesting and less demeaning things to talk about in regards to her character.

Why is a fictional character's visual design demeaning? We are not talking about a real person, we are not body shaming a real person, hell we aren't even really body shaming the fictional character.

Fictional characters have no feelings, they do not have emotions outside the context of the fictional story they inhabit.

I don't feel that critisizing a fictional character directly relates to how you would talk about a real person because fictional characters exist as only fantasy, the same way fantasy violence doesn't beget real world violence.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I get that, but it still needs to be done in a way that presents their personal feelings on the subjective stuff without - one way or another - swaying the mindset of people haven’t even yet played something for themselves.

A lot of people in the comments for those reviews said thanks for saving them $60 based on their subjective feelings they projected into their viewers. Also, they are not nearly as thorough as you’re inclined to think; not even for story stuff let alone technical stuff. Hell, those people in the comments will miss out one of the best sequences Naughty Dog has ever done in terms of story, because they based their own opinions on the incomplete thoughts of some random youtube god.

It's the people's fault if someone says the story sucks and the people blindly take that as fact. It's just the same as buying a game because the Metacritic is say 90+. We've been getting along just fine in reviews of any other medium, there's no reason why video game reviews have specify objectivity vs subjectivity. Even something like a sports game or COD game, which everybody knows what they're getting into; there's little things that are objective in ways but affect the game subjectively. To me, a crucial aspect to an online shooter is balance and what I consider balanced and what someone else considers balanced is 2 different things even though there's objectivity behind it like each gun has objective stats to it but how they affect balance and gameplay is subjective to each player. Same thing happens in a sports game where to most people, they're just roster updates, but something little can greatly positively or negatively affect the enjoyment of the game. I can't play MLB The Show without tuning the game's sliders myself because at default, the game doesn't play like baseball to me. Thus, it's pretty much impossible to only, or greatly, weigh a game's score on objective elements when they inherently have subjective effects.

I'd actually prettymuch 100% say that. The crafting/survival what have you works fine in sandboxes or repeaty loot grinders.

In linear non-repeatable missions in narrative driven games, it just pushes a mindset of "complete encounter, laboriously scavenge the area over before moving on to the next one so you don't put yourself behind the curve". Which is prettymuch a knife in the kidneys to something like TLoU which is trying to push a barely-surviving on the run narrative.

I was saying that more generally because like every game (especially RPGs) has loot and crafting systems and most don't need them, it's just something that's become "that's just what RPGs do" vs it being in the game because it fits the game. A lot of things are in games just because top game XYZ had it so our game has to have it or it's just what people expect a game in XYZ genre to have vs a game just being built around what's good for the game.

For TLOU specifically, I didn't really have much of a problem with it in the 1st game. I'm probably not going to play TLOU2 (I watched a Youtube movie of it though) because I don't really have an interest in playing a 25-hour Naughty Dog game honestly, I take my time with games and I'd probably take past 30 hours in TLOU2; my 1st playthrough of Dishonored 2 clocked in at 40 hours because I checked out everything. I wasn't at all looking forward to scouring the bigger environments of TLOU2 for components. I kinda find the whole searching for resources in games like TLOU or say Resident Evil in a weird place because if you really take the time to search the environment, you'll find loads more resources than you need so why not just give the player a static amount of resources? However, it makes sense to have scavenge for resources vs it just being given to you. Maybe you can have a mechanic where more enemies move into the area after X amount of time after clearing it so you can't just take all day looking for shit.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Maybe you can have a mechanic where more enemies move into the area after X amount of time after clearing it so you can't just take all day looking for shit.

I like the crafting in TLOU2, because you have two limters on your need to scavenge.

#1. you can only hold a certain number of components. The game doesn't let you pick up extra resources.

#2. You can only hold a certain number of specific crafted items like bombs and med kits. So if these are full you can't craft anymore until you use something.

Which means if you play well and search everything, you'll quickly be capped on materials AND the stuff you can craft making it not longer required for you to savenge if you dont want to.

However TLOU2 has collectibles that are independant from this but also optional.

The only other thing is that there are reasons to look for the drugs that would power up your character, but those power ups are pointless usually so you can throw that shit away really.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I like the crafting in TLOU2, because you have two limters on your need to scavenge.

#1. you can only hold a certain number of components. The game doesn't let you pick up extra resources.

#2. You can only hold a certain number of specific crafted items like bombs and med kits. So if these are full you can't craft anymore until you use something.

Which means if you play well and search everything, you'll quickly be capped on materials AND the stuff you can craft making it not longer required for you to savenge if you dont want to.

However TLOU2 has collectibles that are independant from this but also optional.

The only other thing is that there are reasons to look for the drugs that would power up your character, but those power ups are pointless usually so you can throw that shit away really.

I did forget about the carry limits in TLOU. I guess I was more so thinking of RE with regards to having that inventory box that you can hold a ton of shit in so if you fill up, you can dump some stuff in the box and go back and pick up the shit you didn't have room for. Also, the same time of logic in RPG encumbrance where there's nothing stopping you from traveling to a vendor and selling shit to come back and pick up the stuff you couldn't before. The game's not stopping you from getting everything, it's just making you waste more time do so.

 

[CriticalGaming]

I did forget about the carry limits in TLOU. I guess I was more so thinking of RE with regards to having that inventory box that you can hold a ton of shit in so if you fill up, you can dump some stuff in the box and go back and pick up the shit you didn't have room for. Also, the same time of logic in RPG encumbrance where there's nothing stopping you from traveling to a vendor and selling shit to come back and pick up the stuff you couldn't before. The game's not stopping you from getting everything, it's just making you waste more time do so.

well encumbrance can suck a nut sack as far as I'm concerned. There is a limit to how realistic even a realistic game should be IMO. And that line is crossed when you introduce a mechanic that serves no purpose other than to waste the player's time. Especially when this mechanic is used in crafting and gathering games in which you NEED to pick up tons of shit.

I understand item limits, that's ok right? Like Final Fantasy games going "Bro you have 99 potions, that's enough you can't grab anymore". This is ok because it isn't hindering the player at all. There is no weight limit, or item limit of different items, this is simply a cap on how many of a single item you can grab.

But games like Terraria, where you have a pretty limited inventory yet you are constantly picking up piles and piles of shit, this is when it becomes a pain in the ass. Or Skyrim is another example, where you start to move like a slug because you picked up a ten pound bobby pin. This encumbrance gets in the players way, and serves no purpose other than to force the player to stop doing what they want to do in the game in order to go do inventory management before getting back to what they found fun.

I'm a bit more forgiving towards Resident Evil games, because part of those games is the inventory puzzle you have to figure out to balance puzzle pieces, health items, and weapons in a limited space so that you can get through whatever section of the game. But because this is core to the design, it doesn't get in the players way because the player has no reasonable expectation to be able to carry a riot squad's wort of gear in their back pocket. Plus the game establishes the limited inventory as part of the puzzle.

I guess the argument of limited inventory can be passively waved away with "Well if the inventory is limited then obviously the game was designed that way", but there is a feeling about it in any given game that can make such things acceptable, or not.

 

[dscross]

Having looked at some gameplay footage and having been spoiled on most of the major plot points, I don't actually think this game looks bad at all. Bleak, yes. But that's what this world has always been tbh. People could be hating on the story because they wanted it to play out differently. You don't have to like a protagonist to play as them.

 

[SupahEwok]

Apparently there’s a good supply of cattle if she had access to that for food in the story? I haven’t gotten that far yet.

Serious power lifters start with consuming 200-250 grams of protein per day, with diets that can go from 2200 to 4000 calories daily in order to provide the fuel required for the amount of body mass they're building/retaining.

Rationally, any post-apocalyptic society is going to be back to subsistence hunting gathering/agriculture. Without redundant systems and stockpiles of food, there is simply no justification for any one person or group of people to be able to eat more than they need for survival, if they want to survive beyond that year's winter. It doesn't matter if this particular group has a herd of cattle. There is no infrastructure to replace the herd if lost, while there is likely limited space to range them, which means that the population of the herd needs strict control. That would mean a maximum number of cows are chosen to maintain the herd, and only the excess get consumed.

That said, I don't have a stake in this argument. I consider TLoU 1 to be the epitome of the "games wanting to be movies" trend which reached its apex in Generation 7 (or whatever the PS3 generation was), and its reputation vastly overblown. I have no interest in the argument over TLoU 2, other than observing for the laughs from the anger that people see through the magic trick this time.

Edit: despite my argument for why Abby's build would be ridiculous (for a ciswoman) in the setting, I don't actually have a problem with it. The truth of the matter with female character designs is that many are the fetish of somebody on the design team. Shrug at the absurdity and move on, is my feeling.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

well encumbrance can suck a nut sack as far as I'm concerned. There is a limit to how realistic even a realistic game should be IMO. And that line is crossed when you introduce a mechanic that serves no purpose other than to waste the player's time. Especially when this mechanic is used in crafting and gathering games in which you NEED to pick up tons of shit.

I understand item limits, that's ok right? Like Final Fantasy games going "Bro you have 99 potions, that's enough you can't grab anymore". This is ok because it isn't hindering the player at all. There is no weight limit, or item limit of different items, this is simply a cap on how many of a single item you can grab.

But games like Terraria, where you have a pretty limited inventory yet you are constantly picking up piles and piles of shit, this is when it becomes a pain in the ass. Or Skyrim is another example, where you start to move like a slug because you picked up a ten pound bobby pin. This encumbrance gets in the players way, and serves no purpose other than to force the player to stop doing what they want to do in the game in order to go do inventory management before getting back to what they found fun.

I'm a bit more forgiving towards Resident Evil games, because part of those games is the inventory puzzle you have to figure out to balance puzzle pieces, health items, and weapons in a limited space so that you can get through whatever section of the game. But because this is core to the design, it doesn't get in the players way because the player has no reasonable expectation to be able to carry a riot squad's wort of gear in their back pocket. Plus the game establishes the limited inventory as part of the puzzle.

I guess the argument of limited inventory can be passively waved away with "Well if the inventory is limited then obviously the game was designed that way", but there is a feeling about it in any given game that can make such things acceptable, or not.

Yeah, I played Divinity 2 with a bunch of mods to remove pointless shit like carry limits along with the game's loot system so I only had to change equipment when I found something legit better vs just changing it to keep up with the numbers.

I'm not saying the RE games should do away with limited inventories but the game (at least RE4 and RE2 Remake, the ones I've played) gives you so much shit that you'll never run out of stuff like bullets or health items.

 

[Nick Calandra]

Why is a fictional character's visual design demeaning? We are not talking about a real person, we are not body shaming a real person, hell we aren't even really body shaming the fictional character.

Fictional characters have no feelings, they do not have emotions outside the context of the fictional story they inhabit.

I don't feel that critisizing a fictional character directly relates to how you would talk about a real person because fictional characters exist as only fantasy, the same way fantasy violence doesn't beget real world violence.

Yea, I'm not saying she is a real person ha, just saying there's more interesting critiques to talk about than focusing on the physical appearance of a fictional video game character. Your comments were just getting into territory that isn't really on the topic of the game in this thread.

 

[CriticalGaming]

Yea, I'm not saying she is a real person ha, just saying there's more interesting critiques to talk about than focusing on the physical appearance of a fictional video game character. Your comments were just getting into territory that isn't really on the topic of the game in this thread.

Well perhaps, we were just discussion justifications for disliking her design. But fine. Her pony tail is stupid too.

 

[Nick Calandra]

Well perhaps, we were just discussion justifications for disliking her design. But fine. Her pony tail is stupid too.

That one I can agree with considering not having long hair is like Zombie-survival 101 according to The Walking Dead so they can't grab your hair when running away.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

That one I can agree with considering not having long hair is like Zombie-survival 101 according to The Walking Dead so they can't grab your hair when running away.

Don't believe the propoganda. The Zombie Survival Guide taught us the life saving techniques needed to deal with the undead hordes.

Having looked at some gameplay footage and having been spoiled on most of the major plot points, I don't actually think this game looks bad at all. Bleak, yes. But that's what this world has always been tbh. People could be hating on the story because they wanted it to play out differently. You don't have to like a protagonist to play as them.

I would still say they failed with Abby. The fact that so many people, once given control of Abby, proceed to get her killed several times before they do anything else shows this. Joel's death should have been later in the game so that players got to know Abby before hand. Even something as simple as before killing Joel she has a flashback to her father would have gone a long way to making the story better.

 

[dscross]

I would still say they failed with Abby. The fact that so many people, once given control of Abby, proceed to get her killed several times before they do anything else shows this. Joel's death should have been later in the game so that players got to know Abby before hand. Even something as simple as before killing Joel she has a flashback to her father would have gone a long way to making the story better.

I'm getting the impression that the whole point was to make it clear that no-one is good person in this post-apocalypse. But I haven't played it yet myself so maybe I'll think differently when I have to play as her.

 

[CriticalGaming]

The fact that so many people, once given control of Abby, proceed to get her killed several times before they do anything else shows this.

Yeah that was fun, Abby got eaten by so many clickers on my playthrough it was dumb. But i laughed.

 

[dscross]

I found this the most interesting review I've seen, basically saying that the individual elements are some of the best ever in gaming but when you put them together they don't really work in the way they should. I've only watched footage so can't confirm this is the case myself yet.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

In a safe and nutrious world she could have maybe. But not in the zombie apocalypse. My point was never that women COULDNT be she-hulk. But that in the universe in which Abby lives, SHE couldnt. Even with a badass gym, you need nutrition to get there. And also she would be limited to what she could do to her body in zombieland.

Basically if your muscles are fatigued from lifting, you gonna have a hard time running from zombies.


Obviously im over thinking it.

I hate Abby. And i dont want to like her. End of story for me really

Apparently there’s a good supply of cattle if she had access to that for food in the story? I haven’t gotten that far yet.

As an aside have you seen the Netflix movie The Game Changers? It’s worth a watch in general for the value of the perspective it gives. I wasn’t really aware of how naturally suited a vegan diet is for humans.

Serious power lifters start with consuming 200-250 grams of protein per day, with diets that can go from 2200 to 4000 calories daily in order to provide the fuel required for the amount of body mass they're building/retaining.

Rationally, any post-apocalyptic society is going to be back to subsistence hunting gathering/agriculture. Without redundant systems and stockpiles of food, there is simply no justification for any one person or group of people to be able to eat more than they need for survival, if they want to survive beyond that year's winter. It doesn't matter if this particular group has a herd of cattle. There is no infrastructure to replace the herd if lost, while there is likely limited space to range them, which means that the population of the herd needs strict control. That would mean a maximum number of cows are chosen to maintain the herd, and only the excess get consumed.

That said, I don't have a stake in this argument. I consider TLoU 1 to be the epitome of the "games wanting to be movies" trend which reached its apex in Generation 7 (or whatever the PS3 generation was), and its reputation vastly overblown. I have no interest in the argument over TLoU 2, other than observing for the laughs from the anger that people see through the magic trick this time.

Edit: despite my argument for why Abby's build would be ridiculous (for a ciswoman) in the setting, I don't actually have a problem with it. The truth of the matter with female character designs is that many are the fetish of somebody on the design team. Shrug at the absurdity and move on, is my feeling.

It’s worth checking out the documentary The Game Changers. Biggest takeaway is how much farmland and water is wasted growing livestock for human consumption while only providing a fraction of the calories needed. There’s probably no shortage of plant based foods in the world of TLoU2, so maybe she wouldn’t have needed to rely on animal proteins so much.

Anyways, it was only a matter of time -

Fans Start Petition for a 'Remake' of The Last of Us Part II's Storyline (Spoilers) - PlayStation LifeStyle

The Last of Us Part 2 petition is currently live on Change.org, calling for Naughty Dog to "remake" the sequel's narrative.

www.playstationlifestyle.net

 

[CriticalGaming]

Apparently there’s a good supply of cattle if she had access to that for food in the story? I haven’t gotten that far yet.

As an aside have you seen the Netflix movie The Game Changers? It’s worth a watch in general for the value of the perspective it gives. I wasn’t really aware of how naturally suited a vegan diet is for humans.




It’s worth checking out the documentary The Game Changers. Biggest takeaway is how much farmland and water is wasted growing livestock for human consumption while only providing a fraction of the calories needed.

Regardless of cattle available in the settlement, i didnt notice them but i could have missed that, no reasonable survivor encampment would over feed a woman who wanted to get swoll. The settlement is surviving not living in excess.

Also in regards to veganism which is entirely off topic, most documentaries revolving around diet are extremely bias and skew facts to make things better than they seem.

Can you live vegan? Sure. But if you wanna be swoll boys you need suplimental vitamins and such to do it. And most nutritionists working with athletes dont really suggest veganism for something like bodybuilding or playing as a linebacker in the NFL.

Thats all ill say about it since it is off topic as hell

 

[Casual Shinji]

Having looked at some gameplay footage and having been spoiled on most of the major plot points, I don't actually think this game looks bad at all. Bleak, yes. But that's what this world has always been tbh. People could be hating on the story because they wanted it to play out differently. You don't have to like a protagonist to play as them.

I think the overall opinion on TLoU2 is going to even out over the next 6 months to a year. Right now though everything is kinda on fire.

Anyways, it was only a matter of time -

Fans Start Petition for a 'Remake' of The Last of Us Part II's Storyline (Spoilers) - PlayStation LifeStyle

The Last of Us Part 2 petition is currently live on Change.org, calling for Naughty Dog to "remake" the sequel's narrative.

www.playstationlifestyle.net

People are too in love with Joel. At least, I'm assuming that's what this petition is about.

 

[Catfood220]

So, just out of curiosity. Has this Abby chick basically been roaming post apocalypse America hunting down and killing anyone named Joel like the Terminator in the first film. Or has someone given her a really good description of him. Because to me he looks like generic bearded, scruffy/rugged survival guy. How does she know she has the right Joel?

 

[Casual Shinji]

So, just out of curiosity. Has this Abby chick basically been roaming post apocalypse America hunting down and killing anyone named Joel like the Terminator in the first film. Or has someone given her a really good description of him. Because to me he looks like generic bearded, scruffy/rugged survival guy. How does she know she has the right Joel?

She actually discovers Tommy's whereabouts first, which makes sense since he used to be a Firefly, and when they go to Jackson it's actually to go after him in order to find Joel. At the start of the game you hear her and Owen talk about a 'he', and you're thinking it's Joel, but it's actually Tommy. Then through a bit of luck she runs into both of them, probably recognizes Tommy, hears the older guy's name is Joel, and puts two and two together.