I'd place the degree of quality in the Bioshock world as Bioshock, Bioshock Infinite, and then let's all just forget about Bioshock 2.zombiejoe said:
Which is better,which is overrated. Bioshock infinite vs the last of us
- Thread starter rbstewart7263
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I came to this conclusion last year. They're both exactly the same level of quality
The Last of Us has a better story and slightly better voice acting
Bioshock Infinite is slightly more fun to play
The Last of Us is really solidly designed but riddled with little nitpicks
Bioshock Infinite is kind of sloppily designed with one really big problem right at the end
Last of Us has really shitty multyplayer
Bioshock infinite has really shitty DLC
I think they're both over rated to exactly the same degree even they're both very good games and both worth playing
The Last of Us has a better story and slightly better voice acting
Bioshock Infinite is slightly more fun to play
The Last of Us is really solidly designed but riddled with little nitpicks
Bioshock Infinite is kind of sloppily designed with one really big problem right at the end
Last of Us has really shitty multyplayer
Bioshock infinite has really shitty DLC
I think they're both over rated to exactly the same degree even they're both very good games and both worth playing
I think the Last of Us should win because it incorporates cover based gameplay without having you stick to the walls like a fucking magnet. Just play Hitman Absolution to see what I'm getting at.
Both games are fantastic. Infinite had the better Sci-fi story and pretty good gameplay, but the Last of Us had fantastic gameplay in stealth and combat.
Both games are fantastic. Infinite had the better Sci-fi story and pretty good gameplay, but the Last of Us had fantastic gameplay in stealth and combat.
It was more that it was void of soul. The levels felt really small and fake. I think that's the sum of it. The truth is that it's a better game than a lot of other titles that crop up every year. But a legitimate successor to Bioshock 1 it wasn't.zombiejoe said:
Both are Overrated.
Both are Better.
Just depends on who you are, what you're looking for, and how you want to get it.
Both are Better.
Just depends on who you are, what you're looking for, and how you want to get it.
Bioshock Infinite is really good once you stop looking down your nose at it. Haven't played the other one.
Hey man, Resident Evil 4... Just saying.Lightknight said:
Anyway, The Last of Us could've used some physical interaction with Ellie during combat. Not even in the form of protecting, but like the way Ellie could bail you out of trouble - Have it be some sort of synergy that you as the player can influence somehow, instead of it being depended on the whim of the A.I. Now this would've probably been a colossal task for the programmers, but something along those lines would've helped in making Ellie feel like a more physical reactive presence.
I'm certainly no strong swimmer, but I doubt people in general are very agile in the water unless they're well trained athletes. And when I see Joel swim I'm like 'Yeah, that's typically how we swim'. Of course you can say that anybody would use their hands to help push them along underwater, but that would've necessitated a whole new mechanic on top of the seperate one reserved for swimming. And when putting swimming sections in a game that is not primarily about swimming, it's like making an entire seperate game. So I tend to give developers some slack in that regard.
Which it does. Because its a Moral Point System, not a Moral Choose System. They serve the same purpose in a broader sense, but a MPS is only hinted at and done through main mechanics. For example:Casual Shinji said:
...is the game's way to say: "hey, there's a Moral Point System, you (the player) should keep that in mind." Other than one other moment, everything else works in as character moments and/or as ties in with the themes.PoolCleaningRobot said:
All games end up in the end as math. But especially if you see it in a context that reduce it to numbers.
["quote="" post="9.850253.21016275"]Not every [game]story needs to be decided by a player.[/quote]
You do know that the player is the protagonist? In every game ever.
Because it's only a small part of the large combat system.
Kinda, its because the actions themself aren't what's important, but why the player do them is the important thing. An example in 2033 is the requirement of stealthing through some segments. Seen, through purely main mechanics, what asked of the player is do you stealth or do you shoot . In the context of the MPS, what is asked is do you take the time to find the "right" but harder way and stealth your way through , or do you do you force you way through with violence .
The story, plot, and characters of TLOU was better than Infinite, and on top of that the gameplay fit the game better than Infinite's did. Infinite's gameplay was more fun and its universe is more interesting. Neither live up to that big game changer, but I'd say at least TLOU manages to pull of characters probably better than any other game I've played in awhile, so it's the one that actually feels closer to something fresher. So ultimately, I'd say TLOU was better, Infinite was overrated.
Its math specifically decided by the game when you have enough karma points. Bullets as money may be math, but its an interaction that's entirely up for the player to understand and weigh, giving it more meaningGoliath100 said:
Have you considered that's not true all? The only thing the player and the protagonist share in every game is perspective. But more on that in a minute
Interesting how this all got started. Your thesis was:
1) LoU's can't stand on its gameplay alone and
2) Its gameplay and story don't interact
You now are saying LoU has a large combat system and that it interacts with the story. If I didn't know better, I'd say you're just changing your argument with a "true Scotsman fallacy" and you're just grasping at straws. But let's just pretend I do know better. How is it "a small part"? Its the collective of enemy AI and behaviors and the strategies that need to be utilized to respond to threats in the game. Your Metro example is just "press X to take the grieving widow's money" and a bunch of obscure mission objectives.
Uh, I've played Metro like 10 times and I've tried to stealth through the said mission every time and its pretty hard. But the combat is also just as hard so of course the player tries the stealth method, gets spotted, tries again, gives up and shoots their way through. What are you implying this means for Artyom? In the middle of his constant resetting of reality he said "Fuck it. Imma kill these bitches."
You see, in every video game you experience a story (or even a basic series of events) from someone's perspective. Sometimes its more than one person. Sometimes the character is "you" and you have massive character creator levels of control over them. Sometimes, like the case of Metro, you're thrown into someone else's shoes and asked "what would you do?" Or in the case of games like LoU, you're asked to experience and empathize with someone else's choices like Joel and Ellie. The whole point of LoU, is natural selection or kill or be killed. Life doesn't always give your choices. You can chose what will help you live, or you can die. It would have been a very boring game if Joel was killed in the first 15 minutes for being a Good Samaritan
You mean the last game I played in the series and the first one I didn't finish playing through because, try as I might, it wouldn't let me kill that ***** and move on with my life? Hardie Har Har. I wish I could be present in the storyboard room any time someone comes up with an escort mission like that.Casual Shinji said:Hey man, Resident Evil 4... Just saying.
Sure, though I felt like Infinite's girl was annoying. I didn't like having to press a button and be tossed stuff from her all the time, it took me out of the action and I almost never needed anything she had to give me. All the developers had to do was script some baddies that would meander onto the screen from time to time that she could drop, sniper style.
But honestly, I don't think they wanted to make her out to be a super badass. The reliance on the player made the protection instinct a major part of the game. But yeah, maybe there would have been some way to incorporate her a bit more. I'm just not sure what way would have actually enhanced the game. It was nice to be able to forget about her and focus on enemies when the time came.
It's not about agility. It's merely about swimming in the direction you want to. And God forbid you try to swim into a door or submerged bus that the developers put there for you to explore. He goes all crosseyed and forgets how they work because "water". Did you ever die inside a bus struggling to angle the analog just right to get the guy to swim out the door? Ridiculous.
If this wasn't such a known complaint with these sorts of games I'd give developers more slack. My only allowance for TLOU here is that they actually had a reason for including swimming scenes as a mechanic. It worked. I just hated it. Not as much as I hated it in Uncharted though.
We gonna need to hammer this out before getting anywhere. To make it simple, I will refer to the player as "player" and player character/"protagonist" as "avatar".
Just in TLoU you got 3 different avatars, how is it any of themes "perspective" when..:
1) ...the only constant one is the players.
2)... the player is in (almost) direct control of their bodys.
The actions taken in gameplay is the player's, not the avatar's. The player is the one taking the shots, sneaks around and walks around. The best argument you can make is dual protagonists with both player and avatar as protagonists. But that still makes me right about the player being the protagonist.
The player is part of the avatar as long as the avatar is playable. There is no getting around this. The avatar is an incomplete being until the player completes it. And I don't know what more there is to say about it. Without the player, the avatar is brain dead. See how long Joel (or Sarah) gets without youdoing something. The avatar is incomplete without the player.PoolCleaningRobot said:
Just in TLoU you got 3 different avatars, how is it any of themes "perspective" when..:
1) ...the only constant one is the players.
2)... the player is in (almost) direct control of their bodys.
The actions taken in gameplay is the player's, not the avatar's. The player is the one taking the shots, sneaks around and walks around. The best argument you can make is dual protagonists with both player and avatar as protagonists. But that still makes me right about the player being the protagonist.