• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Last of Us |OT| It Can’t Be For Nothing (Spoilers)

Thrakier

Member
I think this is the first time my overwhelming thoughts during play have been how much the technical limitations have marred the game's accomplishments. There are so many instances where it would have been incredibly immersive had the framerate not plummeted, had you not seen those obscene jaggies in the distance or had Ellie not started dry humping a clicker without repercussions. It's a shame because I feel like Naughty Dog nailed so many other aspects where hardware limitations weren't as prevalent.

Even disregarding the shortcomings of the AI you can envision how much were impressive this game could have been on PC/PS4 simply by looking at the cutscenes. The bad AI pretty much killed my motivation for stealth. It feels pointless sneaking around undetected when Ellie runs around psychotically half the time or starts hiding behind a wall in plain view of an oblivious enemy.

That's exactly how I feel just that my main annoyance is actually the framerate. I can overlook the jaggies and the AI, but that muddy, shitty feeling and stuttering in intense sections really kills the mood.

However I got shat on major in the DF thread because people are actually super fine with games with average framerates below 30. They like it that way and I guess one has to accept that. It's what we'll get nextgen as well.
 
I never expected that a building floor with lots of rooms and 5-6 enemies scavenging the place could be such a heart-pounding, adrenaline fueled experience.

Just taking it slow, waiting for 1 enemy to be alone, quickly choking him and hoping another one does not walk into the same room is a great feeling that rarely is present in videogames any more.

The suspense. The thrills. The fun of being caught, running away, becoming the hunted and eventually turn the whole scenario around and become the hunter once more.
 

CoolCat

Member
On my second playthrough right now. Brilliant game, easily my game of the generation!
However, I was extremely (and pleasantly) surprised when i heard that there is single-player DLC planned to be released! Anyone have any info about it? Like what to expect in terms of release date, possible characters, story arcs?
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I was just replying to a post about the nature of games, essentially. The biggest emotional moments of the game are in the cutscenes, and I'm just disappointed that the designers couldn't come up with something more interesting to develop the relationship between Joel and Ellie, considering that they were referencing Ico prior to the game's release.
I actually disagree. My biggest emotional moments were gameplay. I'm too lazy to type spoiler tags though. :)
 

leng jai

Member
That's exactly how I feel just that my main annoyance is actually the framerate. I can overlook the jaggies and the AI, but that muddy, shitty feeling and stuttering in intense sections really kills the mood.

However I got shat on major in the DF thread because people are actually super fine with games with average framerates below 30. They like it that way and I guess one has to accept that. It's what we'll get nextgen as well.

The framerate is definitely a bigger issue because it was a conscious decision from ND that this was acceptable. From the responses in this thread it seems they were mostly right. I guess I just don't understand how people can claim it has no impact when the game is literally varying in responsiveness depending on what's happening on screen.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
leng jai said:
So you agree with the rest of the post? It depends on the geometry and lighting but there are instances where they're pretty obscene. It's not that often though.

No, I pretty much disagree with the entirety of the post. I was just highlighting what struck me as the most egregious example of hyperbole and overstatement in it.

Thing is, I've been playing videogames since the 1970's and given how far the medium's come along in that time seeing this sort of exaggerated reaction to what is -by any standards- a very finely crafted title really rubs me the wrong way.
 

Doran902

Member
The framerate is definitely a bigger issue because it was a conscious decision from ND that this was acceptable. From the responses in this thread it seems they were mostly right. I guess I just don't understand how people can claim it has no impact when the game is literally varying in responsiveness depending on what's happening on screen.

i'm 12 hours into this game and the word framerate never came into my head once

i'm incredibly impressed with this game technically and visually given the 7 year old hardware

some later parts in this game look absolutetly incredible and i never found my experience hindered by poor framerate or jaggies
 
I'm having a good time with the campaign so far but the real surprise for me has been the multiplayer. I didn't even expect to play it going in but I'm having a great time with it thanks to the original touches like crafting and the slow pace.

Last night I was playing a game where we were hunting down the last remaining enemy and I noticed a red dot on my radar in the direction of a house. I slowly made my way towards a pile of wood near the house, crouched behind it for cover, and crafted myself a bomb. I then made my way towards the back of the house and saw an open window on the second floor. I tossed in the bomb and bingo, match over. Such a satisfying feeling.
 

DjRoomba

Banned
That's exactly how I feel just that my main annoyance is actually the framerate. I can overlook the jaggies and the AI, but that muddy, shitty feeling and stuttering in intense sections really kills the mood.

However I got shat on major in the DF thread because people are actually super fine with games with average framerates below 30. They like it that way and I guess one has to accept that. It's what we'll get nextgen as well.

This is another problem aswell. Frame rate is Crysis level bad. This game is nice looking, but the frame rate kills it. Uncharted being as smooth as it is, Im not sure why this is such a problem here.
 

Fantasmo

Member
It's NOT that the framerate is okay. The framerate takes quite a dive. It's that we accept the limitation of the very old PS3 so we play around the framerate. We're talking about 8 year old console, 9 year old tech. You guys want them to dial back all of nuances of their art? You want it to look plain Jane? The tech in here has already killed some old PS3's. You hear that whirring? That's your PS3 struggling to meet the demands of the game. I've never heard my PS3 beg for mercy like it is here. The game succeeds at what it's trying to pull off BECAUSE they took sacrifices in certain areas.

And yes, I probably died because of the framerate. But that was MAYBE twice, the rest of my deaths were due to stupidity, not framerate.

The PS3 is from 2006. Practically high school and college put together. There's only so much you can do there.

I own a PC exactly because consoles are using aging tech. But I'm not going to shit on the PS3 for being 8 years old and I'm not going to crap on Naughty Dog for not being able to find anymore untapped power in 8 year old tech without ruining the look they were going for. The attention to detail that bleeds out of every pore of this game is the reason it succeeds where all other games fail.

And the reason Naughty Dog has the funding for all this is because they are in a league of their own and are exclusive. I'd bet my best pants on them using every trick in the book to even get it looking this good. You think they don't want 60fps, best AA and AF? Why don't you ask them if they want that in the PS3. I bet everyone in Naughty Dog wants it.

And while I'm sure a PS4 up-port would be possible, unless Naughty Dog does it, I'd imagine it'd be a nightmare to do because Cell is a big part of what they do.
 

Inversive

Member
I would have started one if I wasn't a Junior, don't think I've been addicted to a multiplayer in the same way for a long time

hehe same, it can really fun with a good team. I hate it when you get idiots that execute downed enemies rather than revive nearly dead team mates though, so frustrating :/

you up for some games? Still haven't found any gaffers to play with :(
 

Manu

Member
Does anyone have this avatar?

jbqvqXM87GJv1U.jpg


because I just adopted it but i will change if anyone else has it, I havent seen it being used though

Previous page, dude.
 

SpacLock

Member
Beat the game yesterday. Amazing game, GOTY, etc.

I want to start either a hard or insane campaign, but I need to know how they change the gameplay because if the difficulty change gives enemies more health than no thanks. Please tell me that the enemies are not sponges in higher difficulties.
 
It's NOT that the framerate is okay. The framerate takes quite a dive. It's that we accept the limitation of the very old PS3 so we play around the framerate. We're talking about 8 year old console, 9 year old tech. You guys want them to dial back all of nuances of their art? You want it to look plain Jane? The tech in here has already killed some old PS3's. You hear that whirring? That's your PS3 struggling to meet the demands of the game. I've never heard my PS3 beg for mercy like it is here. The game succeeds at what it's trying to pull off BECAUSE they took sacrifices in certain areas.

And yes, I probably died because of the framerate. But that was MAYBE twice, the rest of my deaths were due to stupidity, not framerate.

The PS3 is from 2006. Practically high school and college put together. There's only so much you can do there.


I agree. Eight years is a long run for consoles especially if you consider that the average console cycle has always been around five years.

I always thought God of War 3 and Uncharted 2 peaked the console, but then ND released The Last of Us and I am stunned by the amount of stuff they can squeeze out of it without making it totally unplayable.

The last game that will probably show the next-gen consoles have been long overdue is GTA V. The amount of things they are pouring into that game with probably slightly better graphics than GTA IV, it makes me wonder if they can keep it on a steady 30 FPS.
 
Beat the game yesterday. Amazing game, GOTY, etc.

I want to start either a hard or insane campaign, but I need to know how they change the gameplay because if the difficulty change gives enemies more health than no thanks. Please tell me that the enemies are not sponges in higher difficulties.

Same amount of health.
 

leng jai

Member
The bullet sponge syndrome seemed variable to me. Sometimes it felt like enemies went down instantly and other times I was surprised twice over by an enemy (which I thought was dead) popping back out of cover. Kinda confusing.
 

Owensboro

Member
This is another problem aswell. Frame rate is Crysis level bad. This game is nice looking, but the frame rate kills it. Uncharted being as smooth as it is, Im not sure why this is such a problem here.

I just approach it the same way I did Shadow of the Colossus . Is it a shame? Yeah, and I wish it wasn't there, but holy shit look at the rest of it!

Just want to duck into this thread to say I'm just below 50% of the way into the game, and am having a pretty interesting time so far. I've gone from completely into it (Intro), to starting to get bored (next hour or two), to failing miserably learning game mechanics (15%?)
The first room with infected, the first room with Molotov cocktails
, to not enjoying the super straight paths, to really enjoying (35%)
Bill's Town and finally getting the hang of combat
, and finally, to (50%)
falling into the basement of the hotel, and being scared out of my fucking mind trying to start a generator and get through a keycard door
. This game finally has it's hooks in me and I can't wait to get home to keep playing.

I love when I get this feeling playing a game. Now it's time to abandon thread so I don't read any more spoilers on accident.

A big "Thank You" to the people putting save percentages before their spoilers! It really helps!
 

Fantasmo

Member
I agree. Eight years is a long run for consoles especially if you consider that the average console cycle has always been around five years.

I always thought God of War 3 and Uncharted 2 peaked the console, but then ND released The Last of Us and I am stunned by the amount of stuff they can squeeze out of it without making it totally unplayable.

The last game that will probably show the next-gen consoles have been long overdue is GTA V. The amount of things they are pouring into that game with probably slightly better graphics than GTA IV, it makes me wonder if they can keep it on a steady 30 FPS.

Every fucking company complains about 256/256 memory architecture about the PS3. In The Last of Us, I can't even figure the fuck out where textures begin and end in most cases. The level design seems unique and painstakingly painted to NOT look repetitive. Most areas don't look alike at all. These actually look like buildings with foliage growing out of them. I mean holy crap. Interior areas in games usually look flat and bad. They actually look good here. Somehow ND, managed to make a lot of these interior areas look like it would in real life. Nobody does that. All my "next-gen" PC games look stupid in interior areas. ND took the time and energy to research why and certain areas look glorious for it. I mean fuck me
the interior of the ranch house after they chase Ellie on horseback
looks like lighting wood in a real house. It also looks like a real house. No one else has done that. Why aren't you talking about that?

If EDIT: THEY (not you) want to nitpick it to death, of course, anyone can do that. But I suggest you guys that are complainging start complaining elsewhere because I've never in my life seen a game with such an incredible amount of varied assets. They're probably using about 5 to 10 times the assets anyone else is.

Again, on a 256/256 system. The system that other companies love to bitch about.
This game succeeds in managing a convincing level of human nuance and the world we live because of the choices they made.

And it's on the fucking PS3. Kids who were conceived during the PS3 announcement are like 7 years old now. Think about that for a minute.
 

Thrakier

Member
It's NOT that the framerate is okay. The framerate takes quite a dive. It's that we accept the limitation of the very old PS3 so we play around the framerate. We're talking about 8 year old console, 9 year old tech. You guys want them to dial back all of nuances of their art? You want it to look plain Jane? The tech in here has already killed some old PS3's. You hear that whirring? That's your PS3 struggling to meet the demands of the game. I've never heard my PS3 beg for mercy like it is here. The game succeeds at what it's trying to pull off BECAUSE they took sacrifices in certain areas.

And yes, I probably died because of the framerate. But that was MAYBE twice, the rest of my deaths were due to stupidity, not framerate.

The PS3 is from 2006. Practically high school and college put together. There's only so much you can do there.

I own a PC exactly because consoles are using aging tech. But I'm not going to shit on the PS3 for being 8 years old and I'm not going to crap on Naughty Dog for not being able to find anymore untapped power in 8 year old tech without ruining the look they were going for. The attention to detail that bleeds out of every pore of this game is the reason it succeeds where all other games fail.

And the reason Naughty Dog has the funding for all this is because they are in a league of their own and are exclusive. I'd bet my best pants on them using every trick in the book to even get it looking this good. You think they don't want 60fps, best AA and AF? Why don't you ask them if they want that in the PS3. I bet everyone in Naughty Dog wants it.

And while I'm sure a PS4 up-port would be possible, unless Naughty Dog does it, I'd imagine it'd be a nightmare to do because Cell is a big part of what they do.

See, you describe it very well. They put the game on the PS3 albeit knowing that the hardware couldn't meet their demand (resulting in framedrops and other issues). That's exactly what I'd expect a great developer NOT do to, because a great developer is considering the hardware the game should run on.

So while you say "wow that's great for 8 year old hardware" I say the same, just adding a BUT: it doesn't matter, if it plays like shit, it plays like shit.

To make it even more concrete: I'd rather have them waiting for PS4 or dialing back the graphic effects so that at LEAST a stable 30FPS (which is not great to begin with) would've been possible.
 

Thrakier

Member
I agree. Eight years is a long run for consoles especially if you consider that the average console cycle has always been around five years.

I always thought God of War 3 and Uncharted 2 peaked the console, but then ND released The Last of Us and I am stunned by the amount of stuff they can squeeze out of it without making it totally unplayable.

The last game that will probably show the next-gen consoles have been long overdue is GTA V. The amount of things they are pouring into that game with probably slightly better graphics than GTA IV, it makes me wonder if they can keep it on a steady 30 FPS.

Rockstar doesn't give a fuck about framerate, they made that clear with GTA IV. GTA V will be horrible and I would not take the game as a present. This is one of the reason why I think that Rockstar is not a good GAME developer, rather they are good at making a vision come to life, not caring too much about the gameplay side of things. Same could be said about SOTC.
 

Fantasmo

Member
See, you describe it very well. They put the game on the PS3 albeit knowing that the hardware couldn't meet their demand (resulting in framedrops and other issues). That's exactly what I'd expect a great developer NOT do to, because a great developer is considering the hardware the game should run on.

So while you say "wow that's great for 8 year old hardware" I say the same, just adding a BUT: it doesn't matter, if it plays like shit, it plays like shit.

To make it even more concrete: I'd rather have them waiting for PS4 or dialing back the graphic effects so that at LEAST a stable 30FPS (which is not great to begin with) would've been possible.

You've lost your mind. The NUANCE IS EXACTLY WHAT SEPARATES this game from every other. The NUANCE is what gave them 10/10. It is their attention to detail that gave them massive praise.

The ACHIEVEMENTS in indoor and outdoor lighting, character animation, realistic looking humans, sound design. All of it is LOOKS BETTER THAN ALL OF YOUR PC GAMES nearly a decade old tech. That this thing even works is a miracle and you're fucking insane to think otherwise.

I have a PC that could knock the socks off of this game, but none of my games look better and it's not a goddamn slideshow on the PS3.

That's not Naughty Dog's fault. What's actually happening is they just embarassed the shit out of every other developer out there.

And it doesn't play like shit. You know what runs like shit? Doom on SNES. If you've died more than a couple times due to framerate that's on you. The game gives you the tools to make it through quite easily.

I feel sorry for you that you can't enjoy the masterpiece here. They achieved something no other developer has managed and you're bitching. Go play CoD if you need 60. And that's not even 60 on consoles btw. More like 45-60, and it looks like a big fat dump in comparison.
 

Zemm

Member
What changes did you notice on survivor mode? Less ammo?

There is:

Less ammo
Less crafting materials
Clickers have much much better hearing
Runners are quicker to spot you
Enemies have the same amount of health
Joel seems to take more damage

In about 6 hours of gameplay I must have crafted about 5-6 items and that's with me searching everywhere.
 
Game's IQ is average-to-terrible, in my opinion. Or really great, but only indoors. Like I said earlier in the thread, this game is begging for a PS4 up-port, if just to clean up the IQ. The texture filtering is dreadful, leading to some seriously gross muddy textures on distant objects, the lighting model falls weirdly on the dense flora and occasionally looks flat lit, and the typical console resolution hurts any vista with a lot of stuff going on (grass, trees, props, etc).

The art is fucking amazing and really held back by the poor texture filtering, low resolution, and occasionally dull lighting engine. Would very, very happily double dip on a 1080p 60fps PS4 version (when the day comes that I get a PS4), to make that art really shine.

To be fair, the IQ gets better in the game as it goes on.

I get it yeah, the IQ, FPS in this game is mediocre at best but the game was just too good that I can't really complain about it much anymore. Nearest game I can think of that made me feel like this was Shadow of Colossus.
 

jett

D-Member
See, you describe it very well. They put the game on the PS3 albeit knowing that the hardware couldn't meet their demand (resulting in framedrops and other issues). That's exactly what I'd expect a great developer NOT do to, because a great developer is considering the hardware the game should run on.

So while you say "wow that's great for 8 year old hardware" I say the same, just adding a BUT: it doesn't matter, if it plays like shit, it plays like shit.

To make it even more concrete: I'd rather have them waiting for PS4 or dialing back the graphic effects so that at LEAST a stable 30FPS (which is not great to begin with) would've been possible.

You're just intent on shitting every TLoU related thread with your hyperbolic bullshit, aren't you? I don't understand how people haven't grown tired of your crap already.
 

leng jai

Member
I'm still floored how good the combat feels and how they nailed the sound design.

It's outrageous how many areas that Naughty Dog have become industry leaders in.
 

Vol5

Member
10/10.

Spoiler:
Got to Pittsburgh. This is where the game really takes flight. I've had Ellie save my ass a couple of times now. The first time she took someone out then said something like "Did you see that...? I totally nailed that guy". Superb.

Absolutely incredible game. Full of amazing little touches. Voice talent is simply the best.... Well done ND.

They need another game like this. Same world, different story. Co-op, maybe?
 

Thrakier

Member
You've lost your mind. The NUANCE IS EXACTLY WHAT SEPARATES this game from every other. The NUANCE is what gave them 10/10. It is their attention to detail that gave them massive praise.

The ACHIEVEMENTS in indoor and outdoor lighting, character animation, realistic looking humans, sound design. All of it is LOOKS BETTER THAN ALL OF YOUR PC GAMES nearly a decade old tech. That this thing even works is a miracle and you're fucking insane to think otherwise.

I have a PC that could knock the socks off of this game, but none of my games look better and it's not a goddamn slideshow on the PS3.

That's not Naughty Dog's fault. What's actually happening is they just embarassed the shit out of every other developer out there.

And it doesn't play like shit. You know what runs like shit? Doom on SNES. If you've died more than a couple times due to framerate that's on you. The game gives you the tools to make it through quite easily.

I feel sorry for you that you can't enjoy the masterpiece here. They achieved something no other developer has managed and you're bitching. Go play CoD if you need 60. And that's not even 60 on consoles btw. More like 45-60, and it looks like a big fat dump in comparison.

Of course it's NDs "fault", they are the ones who made that game. Technically, I see nothing in this game that I didn't see in other games, but done better. Maybe the indirect lighting in some scenes has the chance of a pole position. Everything else? I've seen it better with a much, much better image quality at a higher resolution. This game maybe is a technical marvel on PS3, but not in general. That really is the problem here. When I want to set a benchmark in graphics, I don't choose a fucking weak system to do so. When I'm making a game I need to consider the machine the game is going to run on.

Also I didn't die once because of the framerate. But I had less fun throughoutt the whole game becuase of it. :)
 

Fistwell

Member
So while you say "wow that's great for 8 year old hardware" I say the same, just adding a BUT: it doesn't matter, if it plays like shit, it plays like shit.
Yeah, pretty much. I can certainly appreciate what it does on that hardware, but that has no bearing on the fact that, yes, the framerate still is bad. The fact that they squeezed miracles out of old hardware does not somehow up my enjoyment of the game. There are no doubts in my mind the gameplay would be largely more fun with at least a steady 30.
 

Thrakier

Member
You're just intent on shitting every TLoU related thread with your hyperbolic bullshit, aren't you? I don't understand how people haven't grown tired of your crap already.

Well, we got the OT, we got a framerate thread and a DF thread. Topic is related to all three of them pretty much. So I'll stop posting in the OT if it makes you feel better. It's everything said anway.
 

Manu

Member
In what universe does this game play "like shit"?

Could the framerate be better? Yeah, maybe. Does is affect my enjoyment of the game? Not at all. Combat feels tight, every single encounter feels tense.

A graphic hiccup here and there does not bring the game down for me. I've played worse polished games, and I've seen them get stellar reviews as well. Suddenly this game plays like shit? I think some people are desperately looking for something to criticize.
 
Guys I'm struggling trying to get a MP thread together as I've been hit with a lot of work even when I get out of work.

If anyone else could take on the task I'd be appreciative, otherwise it could take another day or so.
 

spannicus

Member
Kind of wish I didnt play the game so I can start fresh. I absolutely loved tlou and wonder whats the next game that's going to scratch the itch. Next gen needs to come now.
 

GQman2121

Banned
I'm about 4 hours into the game and the AI is really baffling. Not just the AI, but the design decisions where they could have hide the cpu's shortcomings but chose not too.

Choking a soldier out literally feet behind one of his partners and not having him react is just weird when they intentionally place an emphasis on enemies hearing your movements.

I think I can overlook the Ellie stuff, but the dumb enemies are getting tiresome already because there is so much combat.
 

Vire

Member
For the people complaining about framerate and IQ, how close are you sitting from the TV?...

If you sit back on the couch (the way console gaming was intended), these things are way less noticeable.

If you sit 1 foot away from your computer monitor, of course it's extremely obvious.
 
That's part of the reason why I don't think a no listen mode + hard mode is necessarily the right way to play the game.

I don't think limited resources helps much--it's just going to force you to start stealthing through a game that is pretty poorly designed for that aspect to begin with, and awkardly combing through clicker swarms while your A.I partners are literally bumping up next to them is absolutely mood breaking.
 

spannicus

Member
I remember seriously the A.I kept me on my toes I played on Hard and I was suprised at how much I had to actually study my gameplan before I made a move. There were occasional hiccups but nothing that yook me out of the immersion. Damn I want moooore and I want it now. Sad that TLoU 2 wont feature Joel and Ellie.
 

Manu

Member
I'm about 4 hours into the game and the AI is really baffling. Not just the AI, but the design decisions where they could have hide the cpu's shortcomings but chose not too.

Choking a soldier out literally feet behind one of his partners and not having him react is just weird when they intentionally place an emphasis on enemies hearing your movements.

I think I can overlook the Ellie stuff, but the dumb enemies are getting tiresome already because there is so much combat.

For each bit like that there's the opposite. Enemies trying to negotiate or running away when you take one of them hostage. Enemies realizing you killed one of theirs when they ask them to report and get no answer (including them saying "you there? hey! you hear me?" before getting closer). I feel that for every graphical glitch or AI acting stupid you have three examples of the opposite.
 

spannicus

Member
For each bit like that there's the opposite. Enemies trying to bargain or running away when you take one of them hostage. Enemies realizing you killed one of theirs when they ask them to report and get no answer (including them saying "you there? hey! you hear me?" before getting closer). I feel that for every graphical glitch or AI acting stupid you have three examples of the opposite.

This is true I noticed this. Enemies ran, begged you to let them go and when you didnt kill them they tried to kill you lol. Enemies also heard when you were out of ammo. Damn I loved this game.
 

Usobuko

Banned
A quick question for those who beat the game, I started out on hard. If I beat that, the lower tier mode trophy are automatically unlocked as well? It's just common sense right.
 

Vire

Member
If you just gave away the ending, I'm going to strangle you in your sleep.

Nah, I think he's just commenting on how Naughty Dog said this is more of a self contained story.

Don't worry about it.

A quick question for those who beat the game, I started out on hard. If I beat that, the lower tier mode trophy are automatically unlocked as well? It's just common sense right.

Theoretically yes, that's the way it should work, although people have reported that the trophies aren't unlocking properly. For what its worth I unlocked the "Easy" trophy when I beat it on Normal.
 
Top Bottom