The two weapon limit should[\b] be infuriating. That's the point of survival style games. The variety of weapons in the game is fine, but the fact that you can carry an armoury in your backpack takes away from the survival atmosphere. I dislike the fact that Joel can carry so many weapons on him at a time. A chest/stash system would have worked a lot better. Or just few weapons at all. In I AM ALIVE you get a gun, rope, a backpack with realistic inventory space, and a machete. Also the need for water to live and the very, very, very[/b[] limited ammo for the pistol make for a better survival experience. And due to ammo being so limited you can point an unloaded gun at enemies in order to bluff them and escape fatal situations.Casual Shinji said:I will agree with that in terms of the flamethrower, which takes away the threat of any infected encounter from then on. Granted you get it very late into the game where there are only three infected areas left where you're able to use it. But the fact that it stun-locks all infected, even the Bloaters, was not a smart move by Naughty Dog.
But for the rest, no. I like that the game gives you some weapon variety, instead of just a handgun and just a shotgun or rifle. The way you burn through ammo, having just a two weapon limit would be infuriating as all hell. It would make less sense for a person in that situation to only carry two guns at a time, instead of trying to carry as many as he can.
And the shooting mechanincs reinforced that Joel is not a gunman, he's just a man with a gun. Naughty Dog took a huge risk by implementing the amount of gun sway that they did, and it paid off fantastically. With every shoot I fired I felt like I was firing a real gun and not a videogame weapon.
Also, the shooting mechanics didn't purposefully implement Joel having sub par aim to show his lack of gun experience. That's been an issue for Naughty Dog's Uncharted series as well. It's been the same mediocre shooting mechanics for a while now. As such the shooting mechanics being wonky doesn't fit in this game because of the lack of a survival atmosphere due to its other mechanics. And burning through ammo doesn't really have much consequence because ammo isn't as hard to find as it should be as well as the fact that Joel has the equivalent of a D&D Bag of Holding.
It's pretty Hollywood. The Last of Us' story has been done in Hollywood so very many times. Name a post-apocalypse movie that's come out in the past few decades and they cover the non brooding nihilism that you just described. The Road and The Book of Eli are recent examples. Ever Since the World Ended is another. Hollywood has done movies that parallel The Last of Us' vibe for a long, long time. Maybe not within the last 2 years, but its been done."Its story is very, very vanilla Hollywood and that is something that gamers need to stop calling amazing every time a game cranks a Hollywood movie style story out. It leads to the stories in Western video games becoming as saturated as Western cinema is these days. Simply making a story that would serve as good if it were a movie should not be good enough for gamers that enjoy a game with story. And the massive near perfect scores don't help, then again reviews have lost all integrity at this point if you look at Total War Rome II's scores..."
It... really isn't though.
The game's story is incredibly nihilistic, and not in the typical brooding fashion either. The title itself indicates this; It's about the last remnants of humanity slowly disintegrating, and whatever physical presence we might've had on the world being taken over by nature until no trace of our existence remains.
And I'm sure I wasn't the only who thought either Joel or Ellie was going to die, seeing as that is generally the cheapest manner by which to force empathy for a bonding couple. Instead they both survive with Joel having completely lost a grip on reality, and Ellie's enthusiasm and hope for a better future viciously snapped in half. Living out the rest of their lives in a community which is just as likely to be taken over by bandits or infected as all those places you've traveled through.
That is far from your usual Hollywood fare.
The Last of Us even carries a lot of the tropes associated with apocalypse movies:
The grown up/child duo.
The family styled connection between the two.
The anarchy caused by the Apocalypse.
Cannibals.
Right down to the main protagonist having an unkempt beard.
Its just like how the Uncharted games could have serves as and Indiana Jones/The Mummy/Allan Quartermain.
Seriously, watch The Road and then compare it to the Last of Us. Its almost parallel in story. Its not a bad story for a game but that's the part of the game that's gaining it such critical acclaim for being so "fresh" and "unique" when its not. Its a great trope filled Hollywood script turned into a game and had the survival elements softened.
That's why I say that I AM ALIVE is a better apocalypse survival game than The Last of Us. The Last of Us has a better story but I AM ALIVE has more appropriate gameplay for its story(which is actually pretty good).
The Last of Us is actually a pretty uninspired game when you actually take a look at it for more than 5 minutes. The Last of Us is just another AAA title shows why gamers shouldn't trust rave reviews from major publications.