It has to have a good story, or I won't play or spend $60 on it. I'm glad its like a movie like experience, if it does well enough, heck it could end up being a movie. I can't play a game with just good gameplay. If it has a shit story, I'm out.
TLoU has so many gameplay systems and mechanics that I have no idea how someone could call it an "anti-game." It's a game, first and foremost -- and a damn good game, for that matter.
People are just deeply affected by the story, so the story creates a lot of buzz. More credit should go to how well the gameplay helps you inhabit the harrowing lots of the characters in their struggle to survive.
I didn't realize other people have used that term, but what I mean is that it goes against everything videogames are for, and instead elaborates on the storytelling and cinema aspect of the medium.
Granted what I feel what videogames are is completely subjective, so you might get something out of it that I don't. To me they are skill-based competitive activities, and story is irrelevant.
It means that the game doesn't fit into their narrow-minded description of what a game is supposed to be.
I feel sorry for them. They'd deny themselves the opportunity to experience different types of gaming experience because they already had a fixed criterias of what games are supposed to be. As a result, anything that delineates from the criterias is immediately deemed as non-game. It's bullshit and it's their loss.
It means that the game doesn't fit into their narrow-minded description of what a game is supposed to be.
I feel sorry for them. They'd deny themselves the opportunity to experience different types of gaming experience because they already had a fixed criterias of what games are supposed to be. As a result, anything that delineates from the criterias is immediately deemed as non-game. It's bullshit and it's their loss.
I didn't realize other people have used that term, but what I mean is that it goes against everything videogames are for, and instead elaborates on the storytelling and cinema aspect of the medium.
Granted what I feel what videogames are is completely subjective, so you might get something out of it that I don't. To me they are skill-based competitve activities, and story is irrelevant.
But TLoU is a game by your definition. It presents players with encounters that play out like PUZZLES -- elaborate clockwork constructs spanning multiple floors and rooms and points of entry, with enemies that react differently based on your actions and that are smartly placed with patrol routines you can read like spatial puzzles and tackle accordingly. You have so many tactical tools at your disposal, all of these different items resulting from the real-time crafting system that utilizes your limited resources, and you also have various odds and ends in the environment itself, from bricks and bottles to distract your enemies to various pathways to hide yourself, stalk your enemies or straight-up elude them. Stealth-kills, direct kills, hiding, sneaking, evasion, etc -- all viable strategies, and what strategy is best changes on a minute-to-minute basis. That's emergent design, encouraging experimentation and improvisation, and rewarding skill, quick-thinking and creativity. All hallmarks of a good GAME.
I didn't realize other people have used that term, but what I mean is that it goes against everything videogames are for, and instead elaborates on the storytelling and cinema aspect of the medium.
Granted what I feel what videogames are is completely subjective, so you might get something out of it that I don't. To me they are skill-based competitve activities, and story is irrelevant.
I'm confused. By "skill-based competitive activities", are you saying you don't think single-player games are games? Or are you saying that this particular single-player game doesn't require skill?
Either way, it also has a competitive multiplayer mode, and judging by my poor performance in it, it does require skill that I lack.
I didn't realize other people have used that term, but what I mean is that it goes against everything videogames are for, and instead elaborates on the storytelling and cinema aspect of the medium.
Granted what I feel what videogames are is completely subjective, so you might get something out of it that I don't. To me they are skill-based competitive activities, and story is irrelevant.
I've finished game on Normal, as I always do with games (when I'm looking for a challenge I just fire up some competitive multiplayer game usually), but Hard+ seems like more fun. the scarcity of resources means I don't have to invent my own 'let's try and hoard max supplies and items 80% of the time'. Fits with the mood much better.
One thin I'm debating, tho, is Listening Mode. I'm torn, on one hand it makes things a bit too easy sometimes and I love the tension - I've fired my gun exactly 5 times now and I'm right after
escaping the military with Ellie during the rainy night
.
On one hand I love the tension, on the other I kind of feel out of character. This Solid Snake impersonation doesn't fit Joel too well, and strangling every single foe makes the game significantly less brutal, to the point where it actually makes the world seem kinder.
I'm confused. By "skill-based competitive activities", are you saying you don't think single-player games are games? Or are you saying that this particular single-player game doesn't require skill?
Either way, it also has a competitive multiplayer mode, and judging by my poor performance in it. It does require skill that I lack.
I like single player games where I can show off my skills at the end to my friends and family, maybe get the highest score on some leaderboard. I'm also a big fan of emergent gameplay and a lot of single player games provide that.
This game requires skill don't get me wrong. But the tediousness of gameplay (no matter how good) very much keeps me from the story. Honing my ability to make noise distractions just doesn't interest me as much my interest in the characters and environment.
It means that the game doesn't fit into their narrow-minded description of what a game is supposed to be.
I feel sorry for them. They'd deny themselves the opportunity to experience different types of gaming experience because they already had a fixed criterias of what games are supposed to be. As a result, anything that delineates from the criterias is immediately deemed as non-game. It's bullshit and it's their loss.
On one hand I love the tension, on the other I kind of feel out of character. This Solid Snake impersonation doesn't fit Joel too well, and strangling every single foe makes the game significantly less brutal, to the point where it actually makes the world seem kinder.
But TLoU is a game by your definition. It presents players with encounters that play out like PUZZLES -- elaborate clockwork constructs spanning multiple floors and rooms and points of entry, with enemies that react differently based on your actions and that are smartly placed with patrol routines you can read like spatial puzzles and tackle accordingly. You have so many tactical tools at your disposal, all of these different items resulting from the real-time crafting system that utilizes your limited resources, and you also have various odds and ends in the environment itself, from bricks and bottles to distract your enemies to various pathways to hide yourself, stalk your enemies or straight-up elude them. Stealth-kills, direct kills, hiding, sneaking, evasion, etc -- all viable strategies, and what strategy is best changes on a minute-to-minute basis. That's emergent design, encouraging experimentation and improvisation, and rewarding skill, quick-thinking and creativity. All hallmarks of a good GAME.
I do agree with this 100%. With the right presentation, I think I could enjoy it. I think I'm realizing I just don't like the setting very much. Maybe I'm just getting sick of zombies.
I like single player games where I can show off my skills at the end to my friends and family, maybe get the highest score on some leaderboard. I'm also a big fan of emergent gameplay and a lot of single player games provide that.
This game requires skill don't get me wrong. But the tediousness of gameplay (no matter how good) very much keeps me from the story. Honing my ability to make noise distractions just doesn't interest me as much my interest in the characters and environment.
TLoU has so many gameplay systems and mechanics that I have no idea how someone could call it an "anti-game." It's a game, first and foremost -- and a damn good game, for that matter.
People are just deeply affected by the story, so the story creates a lot of buzz. More credit should go to how well the gameplay helps you inhabit the harrowing lots of the characters in their struggle to survive.
Can't get too much into why while in this thread, but I agree 100%. The game is tense in all the right ways and when I get to a cutscene that portrays a release of some of the tension, it makes the emotional release I felt so much more powerful.
TBH nothing rustles my jimmies more then "gamers" who only care about "gameplay"
For me i like to be invested in something when playing single-player games, if i wanted purely gameplay i would go play flash games or play multiplayer games.
And if everyone made games purely on gameplay, then there would be less investment in music, art direction and characters. I mean whats the point of music, characters and art direction if all you care about is gameplay. Might as well go play pong all day. What an outdated bunch
Hmm, I'm just not sure how the story gets in the way for you. All of the cutscenes add up to 90 minutes, but that was spread over what was a ~20-hour experience for me. I never felt like the storytelling was getting in the way. The game's storytelling style is rather brisk -- it's never long before you're back to exploring, scavenging, crafting, stealth, combat, etc. This isn't like MGS where it's a broken hodgepodge of playable and non-playable bits. TLoU is a substantial game, with some cutscenes here and there to add dramatic weight to the gameplay. Probably more so than any other game that comes to mind, the narrative and gameplay components combine into a truly cohesive whole.
I do agree with this 100%. With the right presentation, I think I could enjoy it. I think I'm realizing I just don't like the setting very much. Maybe I'm just getting sick of zombies.
That could be it. The last zombie game I played was the first Left 4 Dead, and the last stealth game I played was MGS4, so this game was a big change of pace for me.
You mean the 90-minute "Grounded" documentary? There are LOTS of spoilers in it. It even warns you at the start. Don't watch it until you've finished the game.
You mean the 90-minute "Grounded" documentary? There are LOTS of spoilers in it. It even warns you at the start. Don't watch it until you've finished the game.
finally finished this last night and I just have to say it by far the best game I've played in years... I mean, from start to end it's beautiful and awesome....
I picked this game up and hate it. The story seems pretty good but overall it just feels very anti-game to me. I guess there's room for it in the ps3 library but this just isn't what I seek in a videogame experience. It's actually very far from it.
I feel like stories like this should be left for TV/movies. No matter how good the gameplay is, it's going to seem very tedious when I just want to see the story.
So I was playing survivor-mode yesterday and got to the place where
Ellie is supporting you with the rifle and you have to clear a path.
. I had dangerously low health so whenever I got discovered, I never wasted my time with gunfire because usually that means someone gets to flank me, and just one or two hits and I'd be dead. So instead I basically rushed anyone close enough and meleed them, hoping they wouldn't hit me.
Now, one thing that struck me was that it seemed like getting a melee hit while running had a bigger impact than a regular melee hit. It might have been 2x4/bat/pipe differences, but it really felt like whenever I ran and meleed them I got a one hit kill, or at least one hit resulting in them falling over waiting to be finished off. Regardless of your melee weapon.
So I was playing survivor-mode yesterday and got to the place where
Ellie is supporting you with the rifle and you have to clear a path.
. I had dangerously low health so whenever I got discovered, I never wasted my time with gunfire because usually that means someone gets to flank me, and just one or two hits and I'd be dead. So instead I basically rushed anyone close enough and meleed them, hoping they wouldn't hit me.
Now, one thing that struck me was that it seemed like getting a melee hit while running had a bigger impact than a regular melee hit. It might have been 2x4/bat/pipe differences, but it really felt like whenever I ran and meleed them I got a one hit kill, or at least one hit resulting in them falling over waiting to be finished off. Regardless of your melee weapon.
Joel has a sprinting melee animation that seems to do more damage than his normal one. I've also seen him do a jumping melee animation once when I hit the melee button with a pipe equipped when I was above a guy on some stairs. Completely whiffed with the jump attack, but I appreciated the animation effort they put into it.
I don't know if the special animations actually do more damage or not, but it definitely FEELS like they do.
I'm curious, how do you guys play an area or handle those enemies?
I finished the game at 12~ hours, did alot of stealth kills, searched almost every area for loots, died alot of times too. Although I got lucky a few times that I run off a bunch of enemies to save supplies and such.
Joel has a sprinting melee animation that seems to do more damage than his normal one. I've also seen him do a jumping melee animation once when I hit the melee button with a pipe equipped when I was above a guy on some stairs. Completely whiffed with the jump attack, but I appreciated the animation effort they put into it.
I don't know if the special animations actually do more damage or not, but it definitely FEELS like they do.
Yeah, you can definitely see that he puts his stride into the swing. However, maybe it's just the animation that looks like he's doing more damage. But I'm pretty sure some guys went down with just one hit. If that's the case, it could really change my play style, since each melee weapon would essentially be tripled in life (at the expense of making even more noise I guess)
So far, its not really the 10/10 experience all the critics have been saying. It feels like a grittier version of Uncharted. I've hit slow frame rates at times and during some of the cutscenes the screen blinks a couple of times. I've also hit a few glitches.
Its good, don't get me wrong, but not the "game of the generation" so many claim it to be.
I'm halfway through and clocked 6 hours.
Also, I've been pretty thorough in my searches.
Wow at Henry shooting himself and applause to ND for just cutting the end of the season seconds after it happened. You get to react your own way and not made to feel a certain way through dialogue or music cues.
I picked this game up and hate it. The story seems pretty good but overall it just feels very anti-game to me. I guess there's room for it in the ps3 library but this just isn't what I seek in a videogame experience. It's actually very far from it.
I feel like stories like this should be left for TV/movies. No matter how good the gameplay is, it's going to seem very tedious when I just want to see the story.
Yeah they shot themselves in the foot by adding so much story to it. What were they thinking? Same as when they add music to movies. What the hell. I mean when I want to watch a movie I just want words and moving pictures. If I wanted to listen to music I'd go put on a cassette. And don't even get me started on music videos...
I finished it two days ago but I just needed some time to let it all sink in... In Ellie's words, that shit was intense.
The whole ride took me around 20 hours on Hard + No Listen mode, probably because I was stuck in a few places for more than an hour. And I searched every nook and cranny, but still didn't get even half of the collectibles... ahah.
It took me until around the halfway point before I felt like I finally grasped the game mechanics. I used to restart a lot when I got caught, but I learned that you just need to let go of that OCDness and just.. go with the flow. It enhances the experience so much. Play stealthy, and use a strategy, and just hope for the best. If your cover is blown, quickly decide if you can melee/shoot your way out of there, or RUN. You can also try to make them lose your tracks again by running (only against hunters I think) and then use the stealth approach again.
I also didn't know that the enemy AI is really good. When you have a gun, and the enemy only has a melee weapon, you can just aim your weapon at them and sometimes they'll give up, run away or beg for their lives. Discovering stuff like this is really an eye-opener and it made the game so much more enjoyable for me. I took 15 hours to get to 50%, and then 5 hours to get to 100%.
Only a few things gameplay-wise I really didn't like though:
- Getting through a section with stealth and then discovering at the end that you need to clear the whole area before you can continue (I'm mainly talking about
the highschool. Goddamn I was pissed!
)
- This is not necessarily a spoiler but it could make you more alert and over-analyzing of the situation and thus ruin the surprise:
when you walk into a certain place
(location spoiler:
Tommy's camp
)
, there is waist-high cover EVERYWHERE. The moment I stepped into that place I knew there was going to be a firefight.
This was usually handled pretty well, but this just felt.. bad. Like, Uncharted 1 bad.
- Doing something and thus triggering enemies appearing from everywhere. Kinda annoying...
All in all, even if it has its faults, it's a game that everyone should play. It's so good. Naughty Gods indeed.
What I thought Naughty Dog did a good job with was putting cover in a lot of places where there didn't wind up being enemies, making it seem less out of place when there were enemies.
Sprinting melee animation definitely does more damage. If you stun a clicker with a brick and sprint directly at him swinging the pipe you can kill him instantly with one hit without damaging your weapon very much.
Sprinting melee animation definitely does more damage. If you stun a clicker with a brick and sprint directly at him swinging the pipe you can kill him instantly with one hit without damaging your weapon very much.
What I thought Naughty Dog did a good job with was putting cover in a lot of places where there didn't wind up being enemies, making it seem less out of place when there were enemies.
Yeah they did a rather good job hiding it. The post apocalyptic world makes it easier for them to have stuff laying around. What i thought was way to obvious was (end of Winter spoiler -)
the broken glass laying around the main hall before the David fight. I instantly knew that there was a segment coming where i had to sneak around but had to avoid the glass, which would give my position away.
I'm in Winter now. Not sure how much more I have to go. I love it so much. I'm also in team Brick. Always use a brick, it's what I have in my hands when there aren't any enemies immediately best me.
Thank god there isn't that many Uncharted like shooting section...I am in one of them now and it sucks and fuck the 3 minute long(I know I am exagerating )animation when Joel gets hit by a bullet,I hate that shit lol...awesome game so far though...
Thank god there isn't that many Uncharted like shooting section...I am in one of them now and it sucks and fuck the 3 minute long(I know I am exagerating )animation when Joel gets hit by a bullet,I hate that shit lol...awesome game so far though...
That's actually one of my favourite features of the game. I'm so used to just sprinting up to someone, because I know I'll make it to him even if he shoots me. So I sprint towards some guy with a revolver, that shoots me, and I get stumped? I'm like "hells, yeah, this is realistic, and I'm stupid for running at a guy with a gun".
I always was the kinda guy preferring to have stories in games. But lately I realized I just can't play games anymore trying to melt film and game together while executing one half or even both of them mediocre at best. I lost interest in Tomb Raider after 1 hour, Uncharted 3 after 6 hours and even in Bioshock Infinite after 2 hours and haven't completed either of them unfortunately although I want to beat at least Infinite for the ending.
From all the Uncharted games I only managed to beat Uncharted 2, because it had really gripping characters and amazing set pieces.
So I was pretty wary going into The Last of Us to be honest. While the intro was pretty great, the first 2 hours or so after that felt exactly like "I'm not going to beat that game" material.
However since the first clicker encounter I'm doing a 180 on the game right now. The gameplay is fucking awesome and fun to boot. I love experimenting and that the game rewards you for strategically thinking. I'm playing on hard and I'm so glad the game allows for stealth, as I love Splinter Cell and was pretty frustrated with the lacklustre implementation in Uncharted. It's exactly what I wanted from this game and according to most people I have not even seen the best parts yet (currently searching parts with Bill). I was amazed that there wasn't a single enemy encounter in the
subway section
knowing that this is coming from the creators of Uncharted, where everything explodes.
So yeah, I realized for me that I can only play games with a heavy emphasis on story, when the gameplay is either great like in this game or pretty much non-existent like in TWD, so I can focus on the story without having to put up with boring predictable gameplay. Uncharted isn't cutting it for me anymore.
)animation when Joel gets hit by a bullet,I hate that shit lol...awesome game so far though...
