The Last of Us - Review Thread [Emargo up, scores in OP.]
- Thread starter Canis lupus
- Start date
- Status
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
My god. Those scores. I wasn't really interested in this game but I am now.
Not sure why people waste their time on nonsense like this.
Lol this topic took so many turns it making my head spin.
If you can clearly see where the writer has different preferences than you, it's not a shit review, but in fact informative to you.
Gears of War is being pushed as "gritty and dark". See how much leeway there is even in description that specific?
We moved on long ago from talking about the score to actually talking about the content of the review. Gamers that care about metacritic are a sad group.
The fact that the writer's review of Tomb Raider only mentions the gratuitously violent death cut scenes for a small paragraph and then brushes it aside is inconsistent and poor. He can have different preferences, but he should be called out for being inconsistent.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Sethos said:
Talking about them, is enabling them.
You don't discourage trollish behaviour by engaging with them because your attention is what they are craving.
Honestly, Polygon's staffing is like a who's who of people I couldn't give a damn what they think. They are irrelevant to me, top-to-bottom.
I concede nothing. Bad reviewers make bad reviews. Bad reviews don't necessarily mean the reviewer is being dishonest or has ulterior motives. They can be perfectly honest and still get it wrong.
Watch the video of him playing. It's godawful. TLoU requires slow paced action and ammo conservation. Every other review makes this clear. The video proves that the reviewer simply didn't "get it."
I am not rejecting any criticism. I am simply saying that he didn't know WTF he was doing.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I loved FC3:Blood Dragon, but I swear every time I turned the damn thing on I forgot the controls. I guess they're pretty standard for FPSes, but I don't really play those very often
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I'd also add that it is theoretically possible for there to be too much text in an RPG
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
I think at this point the thread is so large that if he went to the trouble to shame all the shamefuls he'd be the one who should be ashamed.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
what the hell is wrong with a low score anyway? people should be more annoyed if a game get's 10s all around because it means at least some reviewers aren't doing their damn job.
the polygon review was the first one i looked at and they backed up their issues just fine from what i could tell.
and this is the forum that got rowdy over gta 4 being supposedly overrated
I just watched the video review again and all I could think was "Why aren't you running away!?".
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
for some people, doing the same thing twice is boring. i dont see how uncharted 3 being a 7.5 in someone's eyes is hyperbole. it's ridiculous that review expectations have come to this.
I haven't played TR (nor Last of Us) so it's pretty useless to speculate. Still, weren't the death scenes in TR just glorified "game over" screens? Or does Lara gouge eyes out of her enemies and mutilate them in various disgusting ways?
Only people new to the thread are talking about the score.
Dude Abides
Banned
Are you talking about the 3.5 minute video review? There's no way you could reasonably draw that conclusion from a handful of snippets.
Totally true. Except, as Edge and others pointed out, the story takes place across a huge swath of America. The "frequency which" "acts they were committing" is obviously stretched out. It's not like POW, POW, POW, action scene after action scene. Presumably the characters travel many miles between each scene. This has to be taken into consideration.
Perhaps it does lack a sense of travel or a sense of them going from place to place and I would agree that's something I'd want to see in the game. But the reviewer doesn't say that.
I'm fine with being unreasonable. Of all the snippets they showed they showed him playing it completely wrong and dumb. If those were the worst snippets, I can concede, that they showed them to make the reviewer look stupid and get hits on their site. Other than that I have no evidence that the reviewer knew what they were doing at all.
The former, similar to the Dead Space franchise. Not nearly as cool, though.
The violence in Tomb Raider is fairly tame, I thought. A lot of people thought it was too much, though. That "Impaled by a tree branch"" GIF got way more attention than I think it deserves.
I've played a little bit of tLoU and all of TR. The death scenes in TR are incredibly violent (you get speared through the chest from random pieces of flotsam while floating down a river for instance). As far as her killing enemies, it's not any worse than any other mature title really. I don't have an issue with TR at all, it's a fun game.
Dude Abides
Banned
They showed like five one-second clips where he was shooting while being rushed by enemies. The rest was cutscenes, stealth, and exploration. You're being ridiculous.
You're sugar coating it way too much. They showed him playing it like a shooter.
Maybe his problem is that he didn't feel like he wanted to protect Joel. Unlike Lara...
Dude Abides
Banned
They showed him shooting at enemies in a few instances where he was being rushed by them. Maybe you should watch it again. Concluding he "played it wrong" or "played it like a shooter" based on a 3.5 minute collection of clips, when he explicitly said it's mostly stealth and that's how you have to play it, until the end when it unfortunately has too much shooting, is just absurd.
I dont care that this game got a 7.5, still a good score. But its a little strange that they give the game very low compared to many other games, when this game is getting 10 everywhere and some reviewers are saying that its the best game that has been released this generation. Some people that is very focused on metacritic cares, but i think people either way know that this is a great game that you don't want to miss.
More_Badass
Member
Be careful guys. On the TLOU general discussion forums, someone posted that there are playthrough videos online. So be on the lookout for spoilers
BruiserBear
Banned
I'm gonna take a stab at answering this, and I'll note, this is my very first post in this thread. I'm not one to argue about review scores, but I do feel like I understand the logic sometimes.
I think there are times where the production of a game, and it's overall grandeur, give the impression of such a high level of care and quality in creating it that people feel irritated when some reviewer shows up and throws a 7.5 at it.
We all know how the videogame review business works. Games like Remember Me score 7.5's. So how could a game like Last of Us, with it's insane polish levels, score the same?
Is it really anger though? I haven't read this whole thread. But these reviews are so usual that it makes for good talking points on a video game message board.
I don't think they aren't doing their jobs, but it definitely raises a red flag to me. A new game, movie, book, whatever that dares to take truly interesting, creative risks will always end up turning some people off. Something that is universally praised across the board is most likely to be just vanilla ice cream.
RedNumberFive
Banned
They could rate it a 1 or a 10 and it wouldn't matter. No one should trust a site that actively accepts payola.
Source on that?
Zabant
Member
The idea that people are up in arms at a gaming critic for voicing their opinion on a game because it's lowering the metacritic score is depressing. Metacritic is a simple aggregator and it's the fault of the industry as a whole that it has such an effect on things. The overall perceived value of a game and the distribution of cash bonuses should not be effected by a single, or small number of outlier reviews.
Now i'm not saying we should chastise and eliminate the odd outlier review because of the effect it has, not at all, i'm a big believer in free speech, what im pointing out is that something is inherently wrong if the system is set up in a way that the majority gets outraged when something like the polygon review happens, IE: People are getting mad at a professional for simply doing their job in voicing their opinion on a video game. This entire situation is fucking ridiculous, we should be encouraging different perspectives and values not excluding them because we disagree.
People need to start treating metacritic less as the be all, end all of a game's value and more of a simple score tracker that shows the general perception of a game from the established review outlets (it's original purpose). If it's gotten to a point where's that's not possible the entire thing needs to be denutted, perhaps the user score should be the only thing listed as it's obvious we're not responsible enough as a whole to let a few critics on the "in list" voice their opinions without shitting on them or letting them effect the overall image of a game, or the money the creators of that game receive.
It's time to stop giving metacritic the power that it has and go back to a time where you weigh up a review based on the person who is reviewing, how much you trust them, their history with the genre and industry, and their overall gaming tastes against your own.
Oh, and of course what they actually have to say about the game, not the little score that is arbitrarily slapped on that's based on an number of ever changing factors that become irrelevant as technology advances.
Now i'm not saying we should chastise and eliminate the odd outlier review because of the effect it has, not at all, i'm a big believer in free speech, what im pointing out is that something is inherently wrong if the system is set up in a way that the majority gets outraged when something like the polygon review happens, IE: People are getting mad at a professional for simply doing their job in voicing their opinion on a video game. This entire situation is fucking ridiculous, we should be encouraging different perspectives and values not excluding them because we disagree.
People need to start treating metacritic less as the be all, end all of a game's value and more of a simple score tracker that shows the general perception of a game from the established review outlets (it's original purpose). If it's gotten to a point where's that's not possible the entire thing needs to be denutted, perhaps the user score should be the only thing listed as it's obvious we're not responsible enough as a whole to let a few critics on the "in list" voice their opinions without shitting on them or letting them effect the overall image of a game, or the money the creators of that game receive.
It's time to stop giving metacritic the power that it has and go back to a time where you weigh up a review based on the person who is reviewing, how much you trust them, their history with the genre and industry, and their overall gaming tastes against your own.
Oh, and of course what they actually have to say about the game, not the little score that is arbitrarily slapped on that's based on an number of ever changing factors that become irrelevant as technology advances.
Okay, I'm sure this game will be really enjoyable....but that Citizen Kane comment.....I think I literally felt my stomach turn a little bit. Please tell me I'm not the only one.
How's the gameplay to watching ratio, btw?
Edit: omg I mean my stomach turned in a BAD way. I mean.....that's a little much....
How's the gameplay to watching ratio, btw?
Edit: omg I mean my stomach turned in a BAD way. I mean.....that's a little much....
That is true. There is a score inflation really ever since I started reading reviews (PS2 era).
rosaceadude2112
Member
the last of us is universally praised across the board.
I totally got douche chills from the Citizen Kane thing too, man.
iNvid02
Member
thats so fucking shitty, i was watching it on twitch too and someone did mention tlou (had a avatar i recognised on gaf actually), and then it occurred to me i could be easily spoiled so i shut that chat down.
few posts above me someone had already said they got spoiled, so damn close. getting spoiled this close to release would be fucking awful
The perfect Dark
Banned
They should release the game now instead of next week. You cannot avoid every spoiler in the next eight days
I'm convinced that The Last of Us has one of the worst release dates I can possibly remember.
It's hard to blame it on the industry when you're posting in a thread that literally revolves around review scores. Look at the OP. It's almost no different than what metacritic provides, just do the average yourself. Unfortunately, even here, most gamers/enthusiasts like to shape their perception of a game on the metacritic they also hate on. It's weird behavior with corporate loyalty roots tangled everywhere.
SniperHunter
Banned
I wonder if the e3 hype will kill the sales for this gam?
There was actually a couple of posts earlier on how Polygon rated "state of decay" an 8.5 while giving "The Last of Us" a 7.5, although State of Decay had quite a few bugs and less polish.
I'm more curious to how people would have behaved if destructoid gave the game a 7.5 instead of polygon (which didn't happen but in this case even jim sterling gave it a 10). You should see the conspiracy theories of what people have thought of polygon just because the number wasn't a 10 or 9.
Some people have been frustrated with that arbitrary number. If there is a ton of unprecedented praise and one "its just good" people will get up in arms about it. It happened with uncharted 3 and Twilight Princess. Even Vanquish.
Its funny because nobody here has actually played it yet, but they want reassurance that they are spending their money on the best game. I think TLoU is already proving itself on a critical level that its definitely a good game, but the whole metacritic score thing has become ridiculous.
I mean when I go to metacritic, look at all the high production value video games getting scores of 90+ then switch to the movies tab and see all the high production value movies almost everywhere but likely never above a 85 for anything recent, theres a problem in the state of gaming journalism everywhere and the way they score games. The whole 10/10 thing and how many reviewers agree with each other makes reading through all of them kind of pointless when they all basically mention the same exact things and opinions don't differ.
I just edited my post but I totally meant it in a BAD way....not a good way. In a roll-my-eyes-hard kind of way.
It seriously should have been tomorrow. Theres going to be a bunch of releases next week, and Sony should have just handled it like Infamous 2 the day before E3. I mean it doesn't matter as the embargo is up, so they could have done the reviews and praised the game at E3 regardless. This is just delaying it a week for no particular reason and keeping it out of the hands of consumers.
And apparently even street dates are being broken which makes a game like this that much harder to remain spoiler free until next friday.
MaximumFlipFlop
Banned
Come on naughty dog... 'Accidentally' slip up and release the game on the PSN store right now. Every passing day is a chance the game gets ruined. Pls pls pls.
Mama had nothing to say about the game. He only comes in to troll on Sony fans. The irony is, he still has yet to make a wall of shame for Skyward Sword, Galaxy 2, or Halo 4. In any case, this thread has been rather mature. There has been far too much pandering to see melt downs and we haven't seen them.
- Status