So Last of Us 2 is getting dragged all over SNS by Users now that it's out

Just finished the game yesterday and couldn’t stop thinking about this game. As preface the original was one of my favourite games of last generation and I replayed the remaster on my PS4 Pro in anticipation of this.

I also avoided all the prerelease spoilers and I don’t want to wade into the cultural firestorm the game seems to set off because it distracts from actual discourse on the game.

I thoroughly enjoyed the game and I think it was a extremely ambitious and bold sequel. It wasn’t perfect by any stretch of the imagination but I think once again Naughty Dog raised the narrative bar. The game I kept thinking about while playing this was oddly Metal Gear Solid 2. Another sequel which launched with a lot of expectations to a beloved original that eschewed a lot of what we expect from a sequel. The bait and switch to playing as Abbey ala Raiden or seeing the main characters in a new light (thinking sniper encounter with Tommy or boss fight with Ellie) were all brilliant touches.

On hard the combat particularly with WFL and Scars was frantic, visceral and fun. I mainly attempted to stealth those encounters but often had my cover blown midday through so had to improvise and thankfully the game gives you a lot of offensive options.

I have a lot more to say but I think it’s a powerful game. I was one of those that felt a sequel really wasn’t necessary given the ending of the first game. While I haven’t completely changed my tune I think if any game was going to get a sequel they needed to bold and decisive on why it’s necessary. I think for large part LOU part 2 accomplishes that.

Nathanial Essex said:
One thing I did notice is that I wasn't impressed with the graphics. In fact, I was a little disappointed. Anyone else agree?
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree. I am playing this on PS4 Pro and it’s a technical marvel. You combine Night Dog’s engine with excellent use of HDR lighting, amazing character models and probably the best animation currently seen in games for a winning combination. I think DF video demonstrates why this game looks so good-

 
Truck_1_0_1_ said:
Not because I'm a diehard Shenmue fan, but no female character has been better-written as strong, pro-female and NOT sexist, than Xiuying.

Probably the only thing that is somewhat sexist, is seeing her undergarments for a split second during her pattern. Otherwise:

- She is beautiful, but in an elegant and classy way; not big-chested, surgically-enhanced, dresses scantily, etc.
- She is physically and emotionally strong; she can eliminate any foe she comes across (well, up until this part in the story) and never wavers or loses her cool, always keeping a clear mind and focus.
- She is master; she didn't sleep her way to the top or use her looks to become Lishao Tao. She rose her way up to be one of Hong Kong's elder masters, solely through merit, hard work and ability.
- Any moments of weakness or vulnerability, are all related to the human condition, not due to selfishness, greed, deceit or any other negative virtue that plagues characters who have downfalls (crying because she misses her brother, showing concern over Ryo, etc.).

How is it that Yu Suzuki (and the other writers, of course) completely knocked the, "Strong Female," character out of the park, 25 years ago and the rest of the videogame world hasn't caught up (again, not to say that there haven't been characters like her since then, but nobody touches her, IMO) yet?

As many have mentioned, Abby is given male characteristics;
- butchy-look
- very masculine body type
- ruthless and physically-imposing (almost always seen in male characters).

By attempting to create a strong female, you are essentially creating a man, with a female name. This is essentially the same issue with Kaouru Sayama in Yakuza 2. Not going to get into it in-depth, but basically, giving a female character:

- a short, masculine haircut (a bob is a bob, sure, but in texts, it de-sexualizes the female)
Click to expand...

Strength and femininity are not attributes that are diametrically opposed to one another. These two scenes from Shenmue show some of the bravest acts I've ever seen.



Take into context that neither Nozomi nor Fangmei are martial artists like Xiuying, Chunyan, Izumi, or Eileen. Yet they willingly put themselves in danger to protect others (with Fangmei being absolutely terrified). While it's true that Ryo saved both of them, I think the point was to show that even the weakest of us can be brave when the situation calls for it. That's a type of strength I think gets overlooked nowadays.
 
Last edited:
I've just finished it today.

I enjoyed it overall but it's not a 10/10 for me at all. Some elements of the story didnt work for me and the ending left me feeling meh.

The game plays well, is stunning, has some really nice moments in it and is a decent sequel but it doesn't live up to the first for me.

7.5/10 and dare I say a little over hyped in my view.
 
I was thinking the same thing in regards to the comparison with the RE remakes. But then again, I probably wouldn’t want any RE games playing like LOU. I think it just comes down to the depth and length of the stories of each series. I’ve only beaten the first LOU once or twice, and I think I’m just about to beat the second one now (I’m at a point where, despite what I said in my previous post about the game being 10 or 15 hours too long, surprisingly I don’t want it to end now). That being said, I still think the LOU games are a bit too long for my taste, at least for the type of games they are. I could beat a single RE game multiple times in a few days and I’m fine with the length, even with the RE3 remake. But man, these LOU games are exhausting, and I started getting tired of the gameplay.
 
So far, I'm only a little ways into the game(I'm not averse to spoilers, so I know most things already it seems).

Graphically, it's astounding and could pass for a PS5 game.

Now, the big issue I have is(and I'll do spoiler tags here):

The death of Joel. I do not mind if he dies, but it made no sense in the context of who his character was from the original game storyline.

He was highly intuitive, untrusting of any stranger and very apocalyptically intelligent. He would've been far more wary.

He saved Abby and for reasons she may have felt were still justified(and unknown to the player at this point, but not hard to deduce), she still kills him. Therefore, as a player, I dont care anything about her anymore. I don't wish to play as her, I don't care about her backstory. I'm not interested, but it is forced upon you.

I think that's my biggest gripe so far.
 
Valascaziel said:
Now, the big issue I have is(and I'll do spoiler tags here):

The death of Joel. I do not mind if he dies, but it made no sense in the context of who his character was from the original game storyline.

He was highly intuitive, untrusting of any stranger and very apocalyptically intelligent. He would've been far more wary.

He saved Abby and for reasons she may have felt were still justified(and unknown to the player at this point, but not hard to deduce), she still kills him. Therefore, as a player, I dont care anything about her anymore. I don't wish to play as her, I don't care about her backstory. I'm not interested, but it is forced upon you.

I think that's my biggest gripe so far.
Click to expand...

I took a little issue with that too, but there’s information in notes and at the beginning section that imply residents of Jackson have been trading and interacting with outsiders for sometime. There’s a note by teacher who talks about not being so sceptical and shooting outsiders.

It’s not too unfathomable to imagine Joel regaining part of his humanity in this community in proceeding 4 years. And not exactly being the on edge character as in the first game but I think it’s a legitimate gripe.
 
Is it just me or is the whole "magical cure" perhaps the most flimsiest thing about this story by far?

It's constantly implied to as being a much needed blessing, yet the logistics of actually creating a vaccine in the real world are a nightmare. Just look at what is going on with CoVid right now. There's no vaccine for it and any tests that are being ran now are just that, tests. There are men and women still toiling away in labs trying to figure this shit out. The complications of not only making a vaccine but also testing it, manufacturing and distributing are a nightmare in a functioning society...so what chance do we have in a world that is a mere shadow of its former self? Where everyone is scourging for supplies. Where there is no economy. Where there is no real means of manufacturing and distribution. Yet somehow the fire flies had a magic doctor on their hands who could save the world with Ellie's brain?

There is no guarantee that this would have worked. In fact, the doctor in charge of this should know that the likelihood of creating vaccine for a fungal infection is quite low.

I don't know. I just always thought the "humanities last hope" and "magic cure" was the weakest thing about the first game and simply felt like a means to an end. Maybe that's why I was rolling my eyes as this was still a debate in TLOU2. Granted, I know for Ellie it's more so her survivors guilt and the fact that Joel lied to her that is the issue. But still, with any real thought, it's so flimsy and falls apart.

Am I the only one that thinks this is the most flimsiest thing about this story and with any real thought it just falls apart?

Also, was it ever explained in the first game what happened to the rest of the world? Was it only America that experienced the fungal breakout? If so? What happened to the rest of the world? If the rest of the world was spared, then why was no one outside trying to help? Surely other countries would have been able to continue research and find a way? (if there is even one). I did think about that as a counter argument but I feel like it's never brought up. Like what if the fireflies had contacts with someone outside of America? But nope, that's not important...which further highlights how flimsy the one last hope part of this story is.

Again, maybe this is why I don't like the sequel. Because it keeps carrying on with this and with any real thought...it just doesn't add up.
 
Last edited:
code l name said:
I took a little issue with that too, but there’s information in notes and at the beginning section that imply residents of Jackson have been trading and interacting with outsiders for sometime. There’s a note by teacher who talks about not being so sceptical and shooting outsiders.

It’s not too unfathomable to imagine Joel regaining part of his humanity in this community in proceeding 4 years. And not exactly being the on edge character as in the first game but I think it’s a legitimate gripe.
Click to expand...

Regaining part of his humanity I can believe. But I still fail to believe Jackson would become so relaxed to forget what the rest of the world looks like...especially Joel. Joel has a dark past. He out of anyone should know just how low humans can go and should still have his guard up in some respect. It's still hard to believe for me and does feel like they just needed it to happen and needed to get it out of the way as fast as possible to push the story forward. It does feel kind of half assed either way.

With that said, I do kind of wonder...what if they had actually went with war on Jackson? What if the story was the WLF invade Jackson? Or not even WLF but something else in particular?
 
Last edited:
danielmann861 said:
Regaining part of his humanity I can believe. But I still fail to believe Jackson would become so relaxed to forget what the rest of the world looks like...especially Joel. Joel has a dark past. He out of anyone should know just how low humans can go and should still have his guard up in some respect. It's still hard to believe for me and does feel like they just needed it to happen and needed to get it out of the way as fast as possible to push the story forward. It does feel kind of half assed either way.
Click to expand...

Neil and Troy address that point here-


I thought it was interesting Troy said they discussed one of Joel’s final thoughts was this is what happens when you trust people and have your guard down. They definitely thought about it at length but it was clear his brutal death was always going to be the primary impetus that drives the story.
 
It might be but I very much doubt anything will come of it. MGS2 was mentioned but V also had stuff that never even got in the game and I feel given that fanbase it was far more controversial, yet nothing happened.

I don’t think there’s much anyone can do other than just not trust certain devs or not watch trailers altogether. They can defend it as “avoiding spoilers” but really that’s flimsy when they can still make a game look cool just showing earlier scenes or gameplay. Or they could be as clueless as those who made trailers for games like Nier and show the last boss lol
 
I finally beat the game a few days ago and I was overall very impressed with it. I really liked the story, even if I thought there were a few hiccups along the way. And I admire the studio for sticking with their vision, even if it is incredibly divisive.

This sort of reminds me of all that nonsense that happened with the Sonic movie. Sure, the original design of Sonic was hideous and I’m glad they changed it, but from a creative perspective it just seems kind of like they sold out to the audience. I’m all for giving the audience what they want, especially in a creative medium, but to really alter your vision based upon that isn’t something that I respect.

People have every right to dislike the story or whatever, but claiming it as false advertising doesn’t make much sense to me. I bought a story-heavy action video game with incredible production values and it delivered. The story and such is all subjective. Same thing can be said about Shenmue III and its promise to move the story forward, even though it went fucking nowhere. Disappointed? Yeah, I was. But I don’t feel like I was bamboozled at all. It’s not like I ordered a steak and they gave me Spam instead.
 
No, that would piss me off. Same thing when I played MGS2 for the first time years ago. And if anything, I probably wouldn’t buy another game from that developer again. That said, I wouldn’t feel entitled to a refund on the basis of false advertising. I feel that’s just the risk you take when buy anything from a creative medium. Keep in mind I’m only speaking from a story perspective. If gameplay features were advertised and then not delivered in the final product, then I totally understand. But when it comes to something as subjective as the quality of a story (or simply not liking the story or storytelling) in a video game, it just is what it is.
 
I finished the game mid last week (otherwise, I've been camping both literally and figuratively). I'll sit a bit longer on my thoughts, as I don't want to be as rash as I was about S3's ending. Hermeneutic distance is crucial to much (good?) art.

For now, I was struck by a few of your comments, @Your Boy Leroy. No hostility, more a thinking out loud:

Your Boy Leroy said:
...I admire the studio for sticking with their vision, even if it is incredibly divisive.

...but claiming it as false advertising doesn’t make much sense to me.

...Disappointed? Yeah, I was. But I don’t feel like I was bamboozled at all. It’s not like I ordered a steak and they gave me Spam instead.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your point on sticking with studio vision (some do demand their own cheap fan-fic and try to police art, just as musicians are supposed to play "their old stuff"), I'd distinguish "false" and "misleading" advertising with this game. To get meta, may we reference Silverback (which I watched last night and appreciated)?

a. Imagine presenting the trailer you did, and then making it be about your ex (or half of it on the fellow you killed in bed). It wouldn't be false not to include those folks in the trailer, but if the movie were of that approach, it would mislead. I sense some Lynchian themes (such as the modulated voice talking to you), suggesting a more conceptual artistic approach (what trailer can present that well?), but, even if that were intended in TLOU2, it never came through.
In your defense, you presented that hit list as a narrative grounding, vs. TLOU2's odd "floating in the abyss" plot. The way TLOU2 story was presented, it easily could've continued: there was no real "stop", because there was no plot arc. It seems like it finished simply because it did. Your movie ended its point, with an ambiguity and openness that makes sense (closer to TLOU1).

b. As to the steak vs. spam: maybe we were offered steak but given spam, but you happened to like it. Good on ya, but I didn't. Perhaps put differently: I ordered quality beef, but was offered quality fish.
I'm not "offended" by the twists, but I'd say in full that the menu was misleading.
 
Last edited:
The trailer showed Joel as the partner of Ellie in her travel. What are you trying to discuss guys.

S3 showed you gonna do the travel with Shenhua to revenge your father. Well now imagine Shenhua getting killed when you reach Bailu and doing the trip with Ren to revenge her. They lied and that's it. It's not subjective.
 
Nigel said:
I finished the game mid last week (otherwise, I've been camping both literally and figuratively). I'll sit a bit longer on my thoughts, as I don't want to be as rash as I was about S3's ending. Hermeneutic distance is crucial to much (good?) art.

For now, I was struck by a few of your comments, @Your Boy Leroy. No hostility, more a thinking out loud:



While I agree with your point on sticking with studio vision (some do demand their own cheap fan-fic and try to police art, just as musicians are supposed to play "their old stuff"), I'd distinguish "false" and "misleading" advertising with this game. To get meta, may we reference Silverback (which I watched last night and appreciated)?

a. Imagine presenting the trailer you did, and then making it be about your ex (or half of it on the fellow you killed in bed). It wouldn't be false not to include those folks in the trailer, but if the movie were of that approach, it would mislead. I sense some Lynchian themes (such as the modulated voice talking to you), suggesting a more conceptual artistic approach (what trailer can present that well?), but, even if that were intended in TLOU2, it never came through.
In your defense, you presented that hit list as a narrative grounding, vs. TLOU2's odd "floating in the abyss" plot. The way TLOU2 story was presented, it easily could've continued: there was no real "stop", because there was no plot arc. It seems like it finished simply because it did. Your movie ended its point, with an ambiguity and openness that makes sense (closer to TLOU1).

b. As to the steak vs. spam: maybe we were offered steak but given spam, but you happened to like it. Good on ya, but I didn't. Perhaps put differently: I ordered quality beef, but was offered quality fish.
I'm not "offended" by the twists, but I'd say in full that the menu was misleading.
Click to expand...

I totally get what you’re saying, and I’m not trying to defend the story, even though I really liked (most) of how it was handled. I’m not even saying that the game didn’t mislead anyone (although I wasn’t too familiar with all of the trailers). People have every right to like or dislike a game/movie/any piece of entertainment for any reason they choose. But to talk about the possibility of getting a refund solely because of that fact? That doesn’t make sense to me. If the game was released full of glitches, then yeah I can agree. But the storytelling aspect is purely a subjective one, and I think that’s all just part of the “deal” when you buy a game, watch a movie, buy a book, etc. I just kind of see it like this: Is the game well made? Yes, technically. But the story is trash? Yes, it’s hot garbage and not what I was expecting. But the game is still well made, right? Well, yeah...

This reminds me of the first trailer that was released for Dead Island, which displayed a beautiful somber tone for the game. Then when the game released, you’re treated to some dude rapping, “Who do you voodoo bitch?!” as soon as the game boots up. It definitely wasn’t what I was expecting, and I was disappointed overall, but that didn’t affect the actual gameplay for me, nor did I consider wanting a refund for the game based on that aspect.

I’m really not trying to say that there’s nothing wrong with LOU2 and people who didn’t like shouldn’t be upset. I’m just saying that bringing up the possibility of mass refunds is nonsensical to me.

And @Nigel, thank so much for watching my film! I’m so glad you picked up on the Lynchian aspects ✊✊✊
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top