Zero Punctuation: The Last of Us

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

Meh, I thought I was having a thoughtful conversation .. not just a rhetorical exercise with someone just shielding on cynisism ... you clearly didn't pay much attention to what I said..

I don't get why you feel the need to be disingenuous out of the box, but it makes me less interested in what you have to say.

I'm sorry that you see me criticising you for making up points on which to attack Yahztee as a defense of cynicism, but I'm beholden to honesty, and that wasn't honest. I don't enjoy Yahtzee's cynicism outside the context of it entertains me.

And again, nobody seems to mind his cynicism when it's a game they don't like. but whatever.

you often tend to be here just to tell people how dumb and wrong they are being for having a certain opinion...

See? See right there? that's kind of my point. I'm not sure if you're lying or just incorrectly inferring, but that's simply not true. You are attacking a made-up point. You did this to Yahtzee, and you're doing it to me.
EDIT: and apparently, you know how wrong it is, since you've changed it since I clicked on the link.

Well, for one, that is what you are not getting, I am not attacking Yahtzee trying to make up fake points, I am providing enough context from his previous statements to back up that THIS critique in particular makes little sense and appears shallow in comparison to other episodes.
And about minding or not minding, there is a question of fairness and coherence, there have been episodes before when I've seen it happen and I do mind. Again he might not be subtle or extremely profound but I have always found the criticism he does DOES provide some form of insight, even under layers of twat jokes... This one, I'm left scratching my head.

I really wonder if there could have been anything this game could have done better to be seen in a kinder light, As I've repeatedly said, it seems that it includes MANY of the specifics that yahtzee often praises as good game design, but he seems to have overlooked them (even to the point of criticizing inaccurate information about the game). I'm sorry, but it appears to me that it's only natural to question what caused this contrast.

As I've said before, I'm not up in arms about it though, I don't expect him to change his mind or acknowledge the brilliance of the points that I am bringing up, but I am simply sharing why I believe his gauge of the game is quite off. In the same way that it is dumb that some people say "HEY YAHTZEE LOVEZ THIS GAME SO I WILL BUY IT" it is silly to believe that because he says so the game is worse, particularly in this case, where the opinions are so divided.

Moreover, additional to the expected ND contempt, it has become clear that yahtzee has been developing some form of console exclusive hatred. And I can't help but wonder if this is permeating into his views, becoming even more cynical and more like the archetype he used to ridicule about the "pc master race".

About how you act in the forum's, I have read many posts by you that are very critical but bring up little constructive criticism. Maybe it is because there is no way to really know -how- you said something, (It is very possible that I am being oversensitive too) but a lot of what you responded to me felt like you were simply dismissing the opinion based on specific details that were unimportant to the actual message (like pointing out spunkgargleweewee, which is undeniably a stupid term that I only mentioned as an explanation), not focusing on the fact that I was speaking about my experiences in the game as a whole in contrast to Yahtzee's rant. NOT picking point by point, but instead displaying components of it as a system that I felt contrasted heavily, and even contradicted, some of his views that seemed so absolute..

Additionally I have listed many components that I feel do make the game worse, there is no denying that there are many problems with TLoU even when you do judge it more positively. I am not trying to sugarcoat this as the best game ever, I am trying to discuss a more fair observation of the nuances of the game that anyone even mildly interested in it should know before taking this face value, since as i said before, unlike other episodes the balance of tough but fair here seem's off.

I would have loved a ruthlessly critical episode about TLOU making use of the profound points where this game has real issues, but instead it seemed like an uninspired rant nitpicking and downplaying all of it's structure. I don't REALLY doubt that Yahtzee played the game, but it is extremely disappointing for me that he put so very little thought into it. Of course this is infinitely subjective, and I know in the great scheme of things neither his opinion nor mine really make much of a difference. People saying it was a great review and that thanks to it they will not buy the game were never going to buy it, and people arguing how great it was still think it was great.
But it really is annoying for people to inform me that "well if you didn't like the game, you wouldn't have a problem with this episode bashing it", because that is completely beside my point. It has no importance and it isn't even true, I enjoy arguing about games, when I think they are good or bad. I have commented here when I feel the episode unjustly describes a game ( even jokingly ), or even defending specific aspects of games that I didn't even like that much as a whole.

Anyhow, I didn't mean to insult you in any way. I don't know if I did, maybe I inferred incorrectly. I do feel people tend to be incredibly dismissive online (because no-one really cares) but I apologize if I was.

I think it's enough of the last of us for a while though... I'm only thankful that he never reviewed Journey, because I'm sort of fearful of how that would have ended.

PS I did not change the post, it's still there.

 

[gridsleep]

So you have to watch out for that everything-proof shield?

I think those are the blokes who grew up and developed the code for God Mode. Which is how I think I would play this game. Were I to play it. Which I won't.

 

[Something Amyss]

I am not attacking Yahtzee trying to make up fake points

Again, not what I said. I said you were making up fake grounds to attack Yahtzee. Which you did. You attributed to him arguments not made in his video. That's dishonest. I addressed those, and I was suddenly defending cynicism or whatever.

PS I did not change the post, it's still there.

What it says now is not what it said in my inbox or what it said when I first loaded the page.

Anyhow, I'm probably not gonna respond anymore, I've seen you around the forums and you often tend to be here just to tell people how dumb and wrong they are being for having a certain opinion... I don't really find that interesting.

Which was untrue in the first place, became:

Anyhow, I'm probably not gonna respond anymore, I've seen you around the forums and you often tend to be here just to tell people how silly their opinions are... I don't really find that interesting.

Which is still sort of untrue, but definitely a change. Saying you didn't change it is a flat-out lie. Do I need to screencap it for you? I still have the notification with the original version in my inbox; it's where I got the original version for this post.

 

[gjkbgt]

.

christ did you read this before you posted it think yep that made all the points in a concise manner and wasn't a wasted of my time.
I'm guessing you hear this a lot but still, wow that's a long post

 

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

I am not attacking Yahtzee trying to make up fake points

Again, not what I said. I said you were making up fake grounds to attack Yahtzee. Which you did. You attributed to him arguments not made in his video. That's dishonest. I addressed those, and I was suddenly defending cynicism or whatever.

PS I did not change the post, it's still there.

What it says now is not what it said in my inbox or what it said when I first loaded the page.

Anyhow, I'm probably not gonna respond anymore, I've seen you around the forums and you often tend to be here just to tell people how dumb and wrong they are being for having a certain opinion... I don't really find that interesting.

Which was untrue in the first place, became:

Anyhow, I'm probably not gonna respond anymore, I've seen you around the forums and you often tend to be here just to tell people how silly their opinions are... I don't really find that interesting.

Which is still sort of untrue, but definitely a change. Saying you didn't change it is a flat-out lie. Do I need to screencap it for you? I still have the notification with the original version in my inbox; it's where I got the original version for this post.

Well, You see there? You are Ignoring the answers which addressed your concerns and picking apart my post and trying to invalidate the reasoning by focusing on points that have no importance towards the message (or anything). Speak about dishonesty.

As I mentioned, all you need is to extrapolate as a smart person (that's why i am not particularly drawing out the exact points, because I expect most people here would understand the analysis), and realize that when I picked those particular points to contrast yahtzee I was presenting them in a systemic approach that would display how his criticism doesn't hold ground throughout the complete game view.

If you don't believe me, play the game, or watch the video someone posted a few pages back clearly showing how his assessment on Ellie's AI uselessness in EVERY aspect of the game is fully debunked, and that is just one of the examples.

And then you call me a liar. I honestly didn't even remember I had made such a small adjustment in my post (probably with the direct purpose of being less insulting) but you managed to insult me anyway. I didn't even notice the difference until you posted them side by side.
I ask you, what do I gain by editing it so subtly and lying about it? Why would you assume I lied about it if it is out in the open? I wrote a whole post trying to soothe the situation because it appeared to me that the conversation could turn aggressive, but you even managed to rip that apart and take away only what was offensive to you (and insult back). It seems to me that you are WAY to defensive about this whole thing, and that is exactly what I wanted to divert.
But hey, whatever, call me a dishonest liar if it helps you invalidate my points without engaging in any thoughtful discussion.

.

christ did you read this before you posted it think yep that made all the points in a concise manner and wasn't a wasted of my time.
I'm guessing you hear this a lot but still, wow that's a long post

I'm sorry, I do tend to write a lot, particularly when I feel an interesting discussion can be made, I suppose it's a habit of mine. I'm sorry if it wastes your time or if you find it uninteresting. You are always free to stop reading at any point.

 

[Mert Matthews]

i don't usually get bothered by when Yahtzee tears apart a game but hes definitely not giving this game a fair video. Last of Us is a marvel of story telling, visual design, and combat. Each encounter is a struggle to survive and the game looks gorgeous. The characters don't get dehumanized as much as they become monsters like everyone they've killed, especially Joel. His actions at the end of the game make everyone who has died along the way meaningless. I strongly recommend everyone play this game and not let this video tarnish the games image. As an Xbox fan i wish this game was on my console.

Ehm... excuse me? Everything you mentioned have been done better. The game has a huge fundamental flaw and most people ignore it because it is so common which comes to your first point: The game is trying to be a movie, except the part at the very beginning which introduced the main character, everything was just like a movie in fact i got more enjoyment when watching the game instead of playing it which is not games are all about, in fact i couldn't finish the game because i was feeling i could instead watch a movie. Visual design: What? I mean yes the environment etc is kind of impressive but it is simply a tool for the atmosphere, honestly i think vampire bloodlines had better visuals because they were there to serve the atmosphere not to be pretty sky boxes. Combat: Combat? What combat? The combat was taken out of other games such as MGS, typical cover based shooting which is fine because they wanted to focus on the story. I think it was average choice in mechanics for combat meaning it doesn't worth a praise. You know, the game gives you the illusion of "Survival" etc but i have a question: Do you ever get hungry in the game? Ever forced to kill someone just to eat them? That would be survival.As it stands it is survival in by hollywood standards which brings us to our final point, dehumanisation or the character development: I liked the development they get but compared to fallout this is victorian era nobility. Each time i see the characters behave "inhumanely" I get reminded of how i killed dozens of raider groups just to see their heads explode and their friends flee with crippled legs before being set on fire. So i think the game is just trying to be a movie which is why it does not deserve a reward. I think the movie is average but as a game i think it is working in the wrong department

 

[Something Amyss]

Well, You see there? You are Ignoring the answers which addressed your concerns and picking apart my post and trying to invalidate the reasoning by focusing on points that have no importance towards the message (or anything). Speak about dishonesty.

You lied. Don't talk to me about dishonesty. I stopped paying attention to your concerns as I said I would, because you approached me in a dishonest fashion. You misrepresented me, my motives, Yahtzee, potentially his motives, and then you flat out lied there.

Why should I pay attention to your concerns if you can't give me the basic courtesy of being truthful? I did EXACTLY what I said I would. That's not dishonest. Sorry.

If you want me to pay attention to "the message," don't wrap it up in lies and mistruths and then insist it's irrelevant. Your entire argument was dishonest. The fact that you're dishonest about the larger picture is most certainly relevant to that.

You could have even just admitted you edited your post, but no. Not even that. Not even that one documentable, verifiable thing.

In fact, the number of times I've had to explain to you that I'm not saying/doing what you claim I am makes me think this is intentional.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ehm... excuse me? Everything you mentioned have been done better.

Harry Potter Syndrome. Sure, everything has been done before and done better, but this is the one we will latch on to because ponies.

(Not that Harry Potter is a bad series; I find it highly entertaining, but it's not the original masterpiece people make it out to be. It's basically big because it hit with a bunch of people who don't normally read this sort of thing)

 

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

Well, You see there? You are Ignoring the answers which addressed your concerns and picking apart my post and trying to invalidate the reasoning by focusing on points that have no importance towards the message (or anything). Speak about dishonesty.

You lied. Don't talk to me about dishonesty. I stopped paying attention to your concerns as I said I would, because you approached me in a dishonest fashion. You misrepresented me, my motives, Yahtzee, potentially his motives, and then you flat out lied there.

Why should I pay attention to your concerns if you can't give me the basic courtesy of being truthful? I did EXACTLY what I said I would. That's not dishonest. Sorry.

If you want me to pay attention to "the message," don't wrap it up in lies and mistruths and then insist it's irrelevant. Your entire argument was dishonest. The fact that you're dishonest about the larger picture is most certainly relevant to that.

You could have even just admitted you edited your post, but no. Not even that. Not even that one documentable, verifiable thing.

In fact, the number of times I've had to explain to you that I'm not saying/doing what you claim I am makes me think this is intentional.

And yet again, although I DID actually let you know that I DID edit the post to make it less aggressive, you insist that I lied... I made a mistake, I forgot about editing the comment in that section, and I apologized, I can't do more than that. I often edit posts mainly for typoes and errors, and I sometimes change the phrasing of things because they simply sounds wrong. I do it everywhere without any intention of deceiving you or anyone, only make it more coherent given that the medium allows it ( and in this case, making the comment less potentially insulting to you).

However, you are completely justifying my assertion, you are making this personal, eliminating the interesting discussion that could be had under the willfully insulting pretense of me not being honest, with out ever really delving into the points that were made here initially. You obviously threw out any intention of communicating, so I suppose there is no point on me trying.

 

[gjkbgt]

[.

Hay no prob man.
But being concise is an important part of communication.
I like that you have a lot to say but your writing literally pages of text.
An't nobody got time for dat
would like to read your comments ad discuss but literally don't have time.
if you want to make comments more accessible try add regal breaks.
make it so you can read any point independent of the others.
And remember there should only be at most three points anyone needs to take away from your comment
e.g. from mine: Not getting at you, comments should be more concise (& a little advice on who to do that)

 

[Something Amyss]

And yet again, although I DID actually let you know that I DID edit the post to make it less aggressive

You changed your story after I demonstrated I could prove it. Given both versions of the line were disingenuous to begin with, given your claims against me and Yahztee were both disingenuous, why should I believe you now?

You can say what you want, but it's hard to have an interesting discussion with someone who makes strawman criticisms. You yourself already tried to pull out, saying you were disinterested and then accused me of sticking up for cynicism, which was a lie in itself. You already claimed this was uninteresting AND you tried to make up an argument as an excuse to back out. Where would the interesting points be from that? Please, enlighten me. And try and do it without lying yet again.

 

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

And yet again, although I DID actually let you know that I DID edit the post to make it less aggressive

You changed your story after I demonstrated I could prove it. Given both versions of the line were disingenuous to begin with, given your claims against me and Yahztee were both disingenuous, why should I believe you now?

You can say what you want, but it's hard to have an interesting discussion with someone who makes strawman criticisms. You yourself already tried to pull out, saying you were disinterested and then accused me of sticking up for cynicism, which was a lie in itself. You already claimed this was uninteresting AND you tried to make up an argument as an excuse to back out. Where would the interesting points be from that? Please, enlighten me. And try and do it without lying yet again.

You know, It's enough. You are clearly trying to get me to insult you back but I simply won't. I directly accused you of nitpicking the post and discrediting it without really facing any of the actual criticism to yahtzee's analysis. And you did, and you are doing it again. It is exactly the reason why I was not keen on continuing the discussion with you, because you are yourself selecting incomplete ideas liberally to disprove my points ABOUT THE CRITICISM OF THIS GAME, NOT YOU, NOT YAHTZEE.

You are ridiculously clinging to the idea that I LIED! OH! the pain I've caused with that TERRRIBLE LIE! At most I changed the phrasing of an idea to your benefit without altering the content in the slightest. I'm not about to get pulled into a childish discussion of if you should believe me or not, I sincerely don't give a damn about your approval.

It seems painfully obvious that the people that have actually played the game are really finding that this episode's commentary is weak and incoherent with HIS previous work. And you are clearly not providing any sort of constructive observations either.

I will not humor your melodramatic trolling any further.

 

[Something Amyss]

You know, It's enough. You are clearly trying to get me to insult you back but I simply won't.

You already did. Remember, I still have the message in my inbox. Were that my goal, I would have got my way already. And Nothing came of it. Huh. Looks like you're falsely ascribing motivations to me.

For the record, that's how we got into this mess. I addressed your criticisms of Yahtzee, many of which were flat-out false, as you accused me of being a Yahtzee apologist as a cop-out. You haven'tgiven me a single reason to take your argument on merit, because your argument is based on false premises. You attribute things to Yahtzee that he didn't say and likely didn't even imply. You attribute to me things I didn't say, mean and DEFINITELY didn't imply.

You can call this nitpicking all you want, but even that's a lie. I've explained to you exactly what the issue is, and you're pretending it's something else. If you don't want to reply, fine. This was going nowhere from the minute you decided to accuse me of motivations I didn't have.

And to further my point:

You are ridiculously clinging to the idea that I LIED! OH! the pain I've caused with that TERRRIBLE LIE!

That's what we call a strawman.

 

[Vicioussama]

Couldn't agree more about the AI not triggering any of the enemies and can just run around and be seen. It definitely breaks gameplay and immersion. Though, ya, having them be a cause for alarm would piss off so many gamers. Definitely might have been better if you could tell them to sit quiet at a place, but that would also kinda make even having them pointless as every area would be "tell the person to sit in a corner safe, go kill all the people, sneak them by." They'd have to do more to really make it worth bringing them around for some added challenge or something.

I don't agree with the smoke bomb bits. You can find many uses for them, especially on higher difficulties. Oh, about the higher difficulties, AI doesn't seem any different. At least between hard and survivor. I didn't try normal or easy. I never choose anything but the hardest difficulty possible in the first play through just for the challenge.

 

[A1]

@ gjkbgt

I realize that this is at least somewhat belated and possibly redundant but it's just to help make sure that the point I made with my edit to my last post gets across.

In the last post you made in response to one of mine you seemed to be needlessly making fun of at least one or two of the things I said. So you really don't seem to be in any position to be accusing anyone of bad etiquette.

 

[Undeadpool]

So people are sick to death of happy endings where everyone and everything gets resolved and you're the big, strong, strapping Hero of the People defending goodness and rightness...so a game comes along that's LITERALLY the exact opposite from beginning to end, and now THAT'S too much of a cliche/downer...and people wonder why no one even TRIES on the internet.

 

[Yahtzee Croshaw]

Why should I pay attention to your concerns if you can't give me the basic courtesy of being truthful?
If you want me to pay attention to "the message," don't wrap it up in lies and mistruths and then insist it's irrelevant. Your entire argument was dishonest. The fact that you're dishonest about the larger picture is most certainly relevant to that.

That's what we call a strawman.

I hope you can at least laugh about the irony of it all:
Many of the people critical of this episode (including me) are in many ways accusing Yahtzee of making a strawman argument about TLoU, attributing characteristics and problems to the game that don?t reflect our game experience or the game?s structure at all.

You are accusing me of accusing Yahtzee using ?fake grounds?, criticizing something he never expressed, and later criticizing your behavior with accusations that are untrue, creating a strawman argument of both you and yahtzee. I have tried not to fall into those conflicts, but I can?t be sure if I?ve misunderstood some of his or your points.
As it?s clear, I?ve apologized repeatedly for any aggressiveness and for jumping to conclusions when it came to your forum conduct, to no avail. I?ve added disclaimers to the points where I edited comments and apologized for that as well. But the truth is that I still find you have not really addressed the underlying criticism to the episode (other than dismissing it as lack of objectiveness), and that you appear to have no real working knowledge of the topic we are actually discussing, namely TLoU.
In fact you appear to be taking the information from yahtzee as truth even when you claim that he is usually inaccurate for the show?s sake (I didn?t mean this as an attack when I brought it up before, just an observation).

The funny part is that you are yourself accepting that you are dismissing my on-topic argument (which mind you, is not only mine), assuming some sort of lack of objectiveness or foul play from my part. But by doing so you are recurring to both a strawman argumentative fallacy and an ad hominem fallacy.
Even If you were right and I was wilfully deceiving you, it bears no importance within the argument: if the biggest, most dishonest liar, brought you a certain line of reasoning, attacking this liar?s nature has no consequence over the truth or validity over his claim. Even more so in this situation where you can easily just determine if the information is true or not (and there is so much data available for you to contrast).

So, that is all. Again I did not wish for it to become such an off topic conversation, resulting in personal attacks that are severely inaccurate, and I assume responsibility for my part in the miscommunication. I repeat that I have no reason to be dishonest in any way, and that I am really optimistic that we can overcome this misunderstanding. And I also sincerely hope that you can rise above the idea that I was being intentionally dishonest, even if it has no real importance in relation to the main topic.
In any case, I?d advise you to play TLoU and find out yourself if the critique adequately portrays key aspects of its structure, since neither my description nor Yahtzee?s really have any validity to your own honest experience of the game.

 

[Merklyn236]

Thank you for also calling out the biggest problem with the "zombie apocalypse" setting - that human life you'd think would be treated as something more precious in such a scenario

Two words for you.

Thomas.
Hobbes.

If you read ANY account of near-apocalyptic events (the plague in Athens, the Black Death, the 30 Years War etc) it becomes abundantly clear that when faced with death on such a massive scale, the value of human life goes down, not up. It is stupidly idealistic to think that when people are dying around you and you cannot tell infected from healthy, friend from foe, you will think of anything but your own skin. In fact, those writers (Thucydides, Boccaccio and so on) do not write about the catastrophe as much as they decry the resulting crisis - ie people turning into animals.

You (and Yahtzee) assume that, in the face of extinction, humans would act rationally.

Correct. Yes, I understand that (despite the outright stupidity of it) humankind has not exactly responded sanely to near-apocalyptic events in the past. For me to deny that would be even dumber.

It's just that I have no interest in that setting anymore. I can't make myself nihilistic enough to enjoy it. All I keep seeing in my head is the diminishing population count, which makes the entire game an exercise in futility. My own opinion and take, true, but it's why I'm not going in for that kind of thing anymore.

 

[Merklyn236]

Another great review Yahtzee, thank you.

Thank you for also calling out the biggest problem with the "zombie apocalypse" setting - that human life you'd think would be treated as something more precious in such a scenario. What was the line that President Roslin had in the BSG movie/series start? "The only way for us to survive is to start having babies." Nah, 6+ Billion people have all been wiped out, humankind is in serious jeapordy of being extinct, and the first thing we need to do is still killing each other because "reasons."

No more zombie games for me thanks.

Really? Thats the "biggest problem" with a zombie setting? That people aren't screwing enough? You're welcome to your opinion but don't you think that people living on the knife edge with limited rations and little to no certainty of safety would have other things on their minds than repopulating the earth? I mean take The Walking Dead, one of the most popular modern works of zombie fiction; when a major character gets pregnant, they're extremely worried, how are they going to take care of it? Babies need lots of specialized care (baby food, medicine for infants, diapers, etc.) that would be incredibly difficult to get post-apocalypse. Thats not even taking into account the low survivability rate of the caretakers.

Why would human life be more precious in the post apocalypse? When there are limited supplies and lots of mouths to feed people would inevitably turn bandit to ensure their own safety. In such a world where life is short and brutal, why wouldn't people look out for themselves first and foremost? Are these survivors really supposed to concern themselves with the survival or humanity as whole above the survival of themselves and those few who they care about?

I just think it's rather petty to abandon an entire genre for a reason that doesn't even really hold up to scrutiny.

I thought the BSG quote appropriate, but apparently it did rankle some people. My point was that in many takes on the post-zombie apocalypse setting, like The Last of Us and The Walking Dead for example, human life is treated cheaper than ever - when it has become a resource that shouldn't be wasted. No, I don't want more screwing in these games (but I do understand that my quote might have brought that up). But how about seeing people being devoted to building or creating resources - not just looting and killing. And, yes I know that,having entire game sections devoted towards, say, trying to find ways to cultivate land, plant food, harvest, etc would likely be boring as hell. But at least it would be reflective of people trying to survive as a species. Not just being the last one alive so they could turn out the lights.

 

[gjkbgt]

@ gjkbgt

I realize that this is at least somewhat belated and possibly redundant but it's just to help make sure that the point I made with my edit to my last post gets across.

In the last post you made in response to one of mine you seemed to be needlessly making fun of at least one or two of the things I said. So you really don't seem to be in any position to be accusing anyone of bad etiquette.

My god. This is great!

I don't know what is better the fact you used @me rather then just quoting (when you already quoted me so know how it works) or the fact you try to act like you want me to read your post.

Yeah i wan't exactly trying to hide the fact your post amused me there was a lot of dumb stuff in it.
I could hate you for it, but why would i hate someone who brought me so much amusement.

And now here you are trying to get the last word, in the manner of a 12 saying "you better run" under his breath as there opponent leaves the.

Also: at least somewhat?

HA!

Don't ever change