The Last of US Discussion

[Soviet Heavy]

Two months late, but still important. So, everybody has been raving about how The Last of Us is the greatest game of this generation. And here's a person being a contrarian who is saying "I don't get the enjoyment of this game/stop liking what I like!"

Yeah, no, I'm not gonna do that. The story is really good. Really good. I'm not disputing that. I felt really attached to the characters, and I understand why Joel did what he did, and how it worked with the story they were trying to tell. All in all, fantastic story.

Now if only the gameplay itself wasn't so bog standard conventional. The enjoyment I got out of the game came from the banter and dialogue. The characters and visuals are really the only thing about the game that shine as being truly exceptional. But the gameplay is just so damn boring that it feels like a chore to slog through certain areas to get to the next bit of downtime with the two leads.

It doesn't help that the setting has been done to death in recent years, and while this is probably the best realized game to use the post apocalypse setting in a while, it's still just post apocalypse that we've seen before. Ruined cities, zombie enemies, overgrown wildlife and flora. We've seen this before.

Gameplay felt trite and dull, and so often it was at odds with the story they were trying to tell.

Spoiler: Mid Game spoilers

Like when Ellie is on the run from David's cannibals. The player can fucking mow down dozens of people with Ellie, knifing them, shooting them and so on. But the story treats her admittedly brutal self defense killing of David like a major point. It's a big disconnect after watching her slaughter half a town. Why should killing David be the thing that traumatizes her?

Really, it feels awfully abrupt when you transition between the quiet moments and then into the 3rd Person Shooter arena sections where you cannot continue until you kill every person in the zone. To me, the gameplay comes off as a detriment to the story.

But I can live with that. I love the KOTOR games and their gameplay is broken, easily exploited shit. I can forgive a lot if a story is good, and good Video game stories are rare. As a story experience, I found The Last of Us a phenomenal experience. I just wish that I didn't have to play it to embrace it.

One of the best game stories told? Absolutely. Best game of the generation? Not even close.

 

[thebakedpotato]

0/10 Starting Zone didn't look a thing like Austin!

 

[Smertnik]

It only qualifies as being "one of the best game stories" because there's hardly any competition. The writing is pretty cheesy and the story is hardly original and is too segmented resulting in it being just a series of loosely connected scenes. Also, not trying to discredit your impression, but I, for one, hated every single character in the game, first and foremost Ellie (Not sure if her coming off as completely insufferable was intentional, though, with her being a teenager and all. If so then job well done, I suppose). The story also suffered greatly from the tired zombie plot and the protagonists being more or less invincible killing machines (as you mentioned) to the point that I could not take the game seriously (which I didn't intend in the first place, considering it's a Naughty Dog title but it would have been nice to be able to).
As long as you disregard the gameplay disconnect I'd say the story is on the level of an average Hollywood flick at best.

 

[Zhukov]

Agreed on story.

However, I really enjoyed the gameplay as well. It wasn't super innovative, granted, but I found it was elevated by some key aspects.

- The stealth and combat complemented each other rather than the combat making the stealth a waste of time. The combat was hard enough that using stealth gave you a valuable edge, but viable and fun enough that it wasn't just 'the thing that happens when you botch the stealth'.

- I liked the scarcity of resources. I keep seeing games promise this, but none deliver. Although even The Last of Us could have gone further. I would have liked about 30% less than the amount of crafting items and ammo that it gives you on the hardest difficulty. I shouldn't ever be able to max out my inventory.

- I liked that it eschewed from big, "epic" set piece battles in favour of small, intense and vicious armed brawls between grubby men with beards.

Bear in mind I've only played on 'hard' and 'survivor' difficulties. I've watched gameplay footage on 'normal' and it appears that you can in fact just shoot your way through the game on that difficulty, which I think is a shame.

I felt that the gameplay, both in terms of mechanics and visual presentation, helped emphasise the brutality of the setting and of Joel himself. Although I could understand if that gets lost in an industry where killing everything that moves is the go-to gameplay model.

As for the spoilered bit...

Spoiler

I thought the idea was that Ellie's violent encounter with David's community as a whole was a major plot point, not just killing David himself. She finally broke down after David was dead because that's when it was finally safe to do so, not because killing David was the only part of the whole episode that was traumatic.

Lastly, I agree that the zombie apocalypse setting did not help the game. It was a slightly different and very well realised zombie apocalypse, but at the end of the day it was still just another zombie apocalypse and gaming is waist-deep int those. They could have done better. There are other disasters capable of bringing human civilisation to its knees, damn it!

 

[stroopwafel]

I enjoyed the story even if it wasn't all that exceptional. The story makes you want to empathize with the characters and it does that well. It just shows how decent writing can make a game so much more enjoyable. I actually quite enjoyed the gameplay as well though. It reminded me a lot of Manhunt on PS2(this game got a lot of criticism for its violence but it was actually one of the best stealth games of that generation). Even in structure; a tense stealth game progressively escalating into more action overtones. Also Carcer City was hell on earth and it didn't even need a zombie apocalypse.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

I hated the gameplay so much that I couldn't even be bothered to play through it for the story. I'm sure it has a good story but damn that gameplay is a tedious slog. Seems to be a common problem with Naughty Dog games. They are better at making cutscenes than they are at making engaging gameplay.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I feel the gameplay actually added some things long gone from action adventure games. Like health bars and carrying more than two weapons. And the way it implemented the latter was brilliant: You can only carry two long guns and two hand guns at a time, but at any moment you can go into your backpack and switch out your selection. And along with crafting and healing, it's all done in real-time.

As for the gameplay action... Calling it brutal doesn't do it justice. It was frank. And I've never seen violence portrayed this way in a game. Nothing about it was glorified, Joel never showed off while killing, and he never made quibs. The action reinforced his character as someone for whom killing has become routine. He doesn't enjoy it, he just does it because it's what he's been doing for the past 20 years to survive.

And beyond that the action felt frantic and chaotic, which is percisely want you would feel like when put in this situation. This is ofcourse given you don't use the Listen/cheat button, which turns every enemy encounter into a waiting game. It was the not knowing where the enemy exactly was that made the stealth so tense, and the fucking up when being spotted that made the action so high-octane. That feeling of being hunted down, but not really knowing what side the danger is coming from...

It's one of the best games I played in years, not because it's innovative, but because nearly every part of it comes together beautifully. Most importantly, it's a game that's true to itself.

 

[Arslan Aladeen]

I enjoyed the game immensely the first time through. When I tried to replay it, I found it much more of a chore than anything. Scenarios created to look like they could be accomplished by stealth, but actually force you into certain battles or sequences.

Examples include Ellie having to save you from the last hunter when Joel gives her a sniper rifle and the game just continually respawning enemies till someone sees you, or when your in the neighborhood getting sniped by a rifle without anyone actually on it because you can't kill the sniper in any manner other than going into the house and trying to sneak up behind him.

A few other issues were flashlights that the enemy only sees in certain conditions, enemy ai that seems to follow you, despite the enemies not knowing where you are. And this ones more of a preference, but I would have liked a Resident Evil style inventory management system. If Joel has no pistol ammo and just keep finding shotgun ammo, why wouldn't he pick up more shotgun ammo?

 

[IronMit]

The game is never going to be 10/10 in every area. If that was possible we would have games with the AI behaviour of Fear 2, the open worldness of Skyrim, the story production value of TLOU, Mechanics from splintercell, MGS& Hitman and the Alpha protocol/mass effect branching dialogue.

For what TLOU is, it is pretty good. Character driven story; the setting, level design, aggressive brutal combat, combat approach decisions, resource mechanics, use of lighting, different enemy types with different AI behaviour, whilst not perfect all try to re-enforce the story.

Not many games even try this, very few pull it off, and hardly any of them execute it as well as TLOU - although there are many problems;

- It's more of a resource illusion- If you're truly terrible then Ellie will throw you health packs
- Your friendly AI is invisible and silent to enemies even though they run all over the place
- Mandatory scripted actions scenes - I expect a consistent set of rules but every now and again you will always get caught- like with the armoured car. (Then again it is story first so it's to be expected- but when I decided to stealth and sneak past the first few guards just to alert them in a scripted sequence and regret not taking them out then that's bad design)
- enemies never run out of bullets but when you kill them they have no bullets - so much is done to re-enforce realism and resources it's a shame they couldn't balance this out.
- Too much killing for the sake of pacing. the sniper in the house, the guys when Ellie runs away, Ellie kills a few too many people before the one on one with David

Some people prefer Bioshock infinte/or insert 9 out of 10 other examples of favourite games. What I would say to that is it's pretty much a FPS template with skyhook level design. You just shoot people in the face whilst a story unfolds. There is no stealth, Elizabeth never gets grabbed by anyone, she just throws you stuff out of mid air. It's great fun and the story is good. One game is simple so it's hard to mess up, the other game is ambitious in more then just story and surface features.

It's brilliant how the game introduced you to this dog eat dog world where you kill to survive. Choose between stealth, aggression and resources to survive. I completely bought into the setting and situations, Joel's motivations etc. So much so at the end I didn't even question killing the fire flies. Not everyone felt this way though, guess the exercise failed on them.

good critique below

 

[cubikill]

I agree with almost everything the OP said. But I think The Last of Us shouldn't even be brought up in the discussion of best game stories. Sure it had great character development, for 2 characters, the rest were one dimensional.
The world and atmosphere were not great, just ok, there are games that do zombies better, like The Walking Dead and DayZ.

But the real reason I hate that it is called the best video game story is it didnt even try to interweave gameplay with the cutscenes. The game felt like 2 different rule sets, The cutscenes and the gameplay. Like the game was worried that we would mess up its perfect story(which wasnt great). Why couldn't Joel patch up his re-bar wound, the plot demanded it.

I feel like the Best stories are the ones that play to the strengths of the medium, like Bioshock 1 and Infinite, Journey, Bastion, the Mass Effect series(excluding the last 2 hours of ME 3), Spec Ops: the line. Or even game that don't give you choice like Half Life 2 and Metro 2033. Why was the twist in Bioshock so good? Well good foreshadowing, great writing, and player interaction.

The Last of Us a game that feels more like a film with begrudging playable ares. That's what i find scary so many people calling the Last of Us the best gaming story ever. It gives that idea that good video games stories should be like playable movies. Rather than using the interactivity to push new are creative ways to tell more personal stories.

Was it the best story ever told in a game no, not even close. Was it the best game of the year, no. Was it the most overrated game I've ever played, yeah less give it that. So it can have one best ever award.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Why couldn't Joel patch up his re-bar wound, the plot demanded it.

No, I think that was more it being a giant iron bar penetrating his abdomen, which is a bit more severe than a punch to the face or a bullet in the arm.

But the real reason I hate that it is called the best video game story is it didnt even try to interweave gameplay with the cutscenes. The game felt like 2 different rule sets, The cutscenes and the gameplay. Like the game was worried that we would mess up its perfect story(which wasnt great).

If you check out one of the meriads of cutscene mash-ups of TLoU on youtube you'll actually find the larger portions of the story and character development missing. There's a host of gameplay moments that prop the story up. Like the Pittsburgh QZ, the sewer section and the story of Ish, the suburb area, and the university campus.

You can dislike it as much as you want, but when people say the story is just the cutscenes... No. No it isn't.

 

[Bat Vader]

I gotta admit I only played The Last of Us for about an hour before I got sick of it. The main and only reason was because of the whole zombie/infected thing. I feel like The Last of US didn't really need zombies/infected and instead could have just had only human enemies.

 

[Nonomori]

I agree with Zhukov and Casual Shinji.

Maybe I'm weird, but even after two playthroughs, I'm not bored with the gameplay. I think there is great balance between combat, stealth and resource management (on the harder difficulties). The pacing and variety helps a lot. It isn't really creative or bold, but it works so damn well that I can't complain.

In my opinion, The Last of Us has succeeded where many other games failed. The setting and genre is familiar, but everything fits in a game with new personality. The formula was tried and tested for years, but it's almost as if you had never seen it before.

I can't stop thinking that it is everything that Spec Ops: The Line tried to be.

 

[IllumInaTIma]

I do agree when people say that TLOU didn't bring anything new to the table, but, the thing is, that what it did bring was polished to the point of brilliance. Story isn't new, but it's perfectly executed and well written. Characters aren't new, but their relationship feels so genuine that it's impossible to not sympathize with them. Setting isn't new, but it's used just how it's supposed to be.

As for gameplay. It was very first game that I played on my PS3, so you can imagine how hard it was for me. Although, I loved it! It is very first game that really conveyed that survival feeling for me.

 

[Mister K]

I failed to find both gameplay and the story interesting.

The gameplay was just not engaging for me. Although, I must thank ND for not making the health bar refill itself over time.

The story for me looked like result of such thought proccess: The Walking Dead game featured a bearded guy, who had to take care of a little girl in a zombie apocalypse setting. This game was successful. This means that we must do the very same thing and get money. It's a "Lone Ranger" situation. But screw it. So what if it is but a copy? My main problems with the story are:
1. Ellie. I just don't like arrogant brats, who think that they are the all-knowing small gods. I don't care about her taking care of Joel when he got wounded, the first impression of her is ruined.
2. The whole thing felt like one HUGE Oscar-bait.

But hey, If I didn't like it, that doesn't mean that the game is bad.

 

[Zhukov]

The story for me looked like result of such thought proccess: The Walking Dead game featured a bearded guy, who had to take care of a little girl in a zombie apocalypse setting. This game was successful. This means that we must do the very same thing and get money. It's a "Lone Ranger" situation.

The Walking Dead came out in 2012. The Last of Us presumably started development in 2011 after the completion of Uncharted 3. Sections of TLoU were shown in a playable and polished state in late 2012, exactly as they were in the final game. It released in 2013. That's not enough time for them to have seen TWD's success and copied it, especially considering that TWD was a bit of a slow-buring success, being episodic and all.

I really wish people would think for half a second before calling copy-cat.

2. The whole thing felt like one HUGE Oscar-bait.

Also, I find this attitude... problematic. It's "oscar-bait" because, what... because it had characterization and character development? Because it had themes? Because it had quiet bits in between the violence?

As someone who enjoys these things, I reeeally don't like the idea of games attempting to have this stuff only to be dismissed for having the cheek to attempt to be anything more. "Meh, that's oscar-bait. More Saint's Row and Duke Nukem please!"

 

[Mister K]

The story for me looked like result of such thought proccess: The Walking Dead game featured a bearded guy, who had to take care of a little girl in a zombie apocalypse setting. This game was successful. This means that we must do the very same thing and get money. It's a "Lone Ranger" situation.

The Walking Dead came out in 2012. The Last of Us presumably started development in 2011 after the completion of Uncharted 3. Sections of TLoU were shown in a playable and polished state in late 2012, exactly as they were in the final game. It released in 2013. That's not enough time for them to have seen TWD's success and copied it, especially considering that TWD was a bit of a slow-buring success, being episodic and all.

I really wish people would think for half a second before calling copy-cat.

2. The whole thing felt like one HUGE Oscar-bait.

Also, I find this attitude... problematic. It's "oscar-bait" because, what... because it had characterization and character development? Because it had themes? Because it had quiet bits in between the violence?

As someone who enjoys these things, I reeeally don't like the idea of games attempting to have this stuff only to be dismissed for having the cheek to attempt to be anything more. "Meh, that's oscar-bait. More Saint's Row and Duke Nukem please!"

First of all, thanks for the info, I did not know about it's development cycle. I don't think I'll use this phrase again.

Second, about baiting. I did not mean that it should be as Saints Row (although part IV is quite nice). What I meant is that those characters felt artificial. Although they had a lot of poligons and poligons mean emotions (sorry, I'll drop this joke too), although they all have problems and grizzlement,I did not feel anything towards them. Oh and "Look, we are showing that this guy is gay, although it has no impact on the story! Look at how modern and tolerant we are!"

For me, it is the same situation as with "The Plane" with Denzel Washington: It wasn't a movie made with love, it was a collection of movie cliches (drinking problem, struggling with concience, prostitute with a golden heart, etc.), brought together to win this piece of golden sh*t.

Back again to TWD: I felt sorry for Kenny and and Ben, although one was a bastard and other one is a fool. I felt a thing for every character. Plus Clementine and Lee are amazingly written, which does not need pointing out.

But those are, as I said, my opinions and are not the ultimate truth.

Third, why do you sound as if you are angry? Why even be angry over something like a game?

 

[IronMit]

Oh and "Look, we are showing that this guy is gay, although it has no impact on the story! Look at how modern and tolerant we are!"

Because if a guy is gay they have to highlight it and make him get over some prejudice or make him a comedy bit???

You missed the point of it btw, one of the themes of the game is companionship. The need to have someone 'someone to fight for'; joel and his daughter, joel and tess, joel and ellie, joel's bro and his new wife, billy and his 'friend', Henry and Sam (remember, he commited suicide seconds after his brother died- in story terms these characters were Joel&Ellie's 'foil'), David and his twisted need for some alpha female partner.

Everybody needs someone to lean on; either lover, friend, sibling etc. Billie was another example of this and him dealing with his lack of companionship in his own way (isolating himself). His previous relationship just happened to be gay, the gay part wasn't important expect to further emphasise it could be any type of relationship to help you get buy.
All this is tied into the finale of the story when Joel and Ellie decide to be together. It's all relevant.

They also weren't afraid to have a lil' joke about it either with the magazine scene.

You clearly didn't understand it and/or are trying to skew anything to support your agenda that the game is some cheap oscar bait. The game is far from perfect but this was not one of its problems.