252 Comments
Posted by Live_Free_or_Die
Posted by Lockes84

Great QL, totally made me walk out the door and buy this.

Edited by SnowyPliskin
Edited by lucasrizoli

Christ almighty, I am irritated by how Patrick speaks: full of junk phrases that embroider very simple things. Perhaps he's spent too much time speaking with marketing. Thank goodness Ryan's there to pull him down.

Posted by sear

Is the ending just the girl shooting the MC in the head because he's been infected?

Probably. SO DEEP AND ARTISTIC

Posted by sear

@efesell said:
@pillclinton said:

@chose said:

So it's a zombie game? ...........

Heh, that's what I'm saying too. I mean, I'll definitely be playing this, because it does look great, but really? More zombies? Does your dark, emotional post apocalyptic game really have to be a zombie game in 2013?

I mean.. sure, but it seems way more like The Walking Dead. It has plenty of zombies but it doesn't feel at all like some old zombie game.

Agreed, and I like The Walking Dead alright too, but it still relies on an extremely tired trope. Last of Us could be a dark, emotional post apocalyptic tale without zombies. That is possible. Just like infinite parallel universes, zombies are a cheap, easy device to justify certain aspects of a narrative.

Let's not forget it's also a videogame aimed at mass audiences, which basically means you have to have shooting or some other form of combat in your game to keep the publisher and shareholders happy, and of course to attract the knuckle-daggers that are going to make up 80% of your sales who just wanna kill things in an awesome way.

Edited by Brad3000

@sir_tonk: They travel to a number of different places in the game, Pittsburg being one of them. If you were to jump back into an early mission after 18 hours I'm sure you'd have perfect recall of which city it was, right?

Edited by Klei

@landon said:

@mofaz said:

The textures in this game are fairly ugly, the outdoor environments generally bland beyond some nice skyboxes and vistas, there are consistent FPS drops throughout the entire game, the melee combat uses outmoded sticking mechanics that make it difficult to disengage from a melee action, the crafting mechanics are shallow, all the encounters are predesigned so there's no real need for improvisation and thus the survival nature of the game is squelched by a superficial lack of dynamic design, the storyline itself is predictable and the story beats are separated in the same fight/explore/story framing as countless games before it.

The upgrade system is dull and the over-reliance on collecting items dilutes the pacing of the exploration elements into tedious corner searching. There are numerous save game bugs, the enemy detection ranges and cones are obscure and typically broken, the AI is boneheaded.

I mean, the game mechanically is a complete and utter mess that fails to live up to the standard of integrated storytelling in a fifteen year old game (Half-Life) but apparently a maudlin storyline and some above-average writing is enough to get this game perfect reviews across the board? Why is everyone so delusional?

Why is it that when ever time a game comes out and gets universal praise there seems to be this agenda to immediately reveal it for the piece of shit that it secretly is and how everyone who likes it is an a brain dead idiot?

Because some people are asses. Like the dude calling this game's textures '' ugly '' and its environments '' bland'' and points the gameplay as '' complete and utter mess ''. But when the game itself gets 9.6 on metacritic, with not a single negative review, you can rest assured that only a very, very small minority of divas will dislike this game. And the funniest part? In a year, they'll probably think very fondly of this game. Just like the hate at the launch of Lords of Shadow, which turned out to be a beloved action game.

Posted by a_beluga_whale

@adam1808: @lazyaza: There are parts where you don't sure, but you still run around, holding a button to aim a gun and shoot. That makes it a shooter. Even if it doesn't emphasize it. Shooting always feels awkward and weird to me on consoles and it always ruins my enjoyment of the game. I will wait until it goes on sale in a month or two and pick it up then.

Why does it feel weird "on consoles"? Are you suggesting that pulling an analog trigger to shoot something is weirder than clicking a mouse button? Because that seems odd to me...

Posted by Efesell

@crusader8463 said:

@adam1808: @lazyaza: There are parts where you don't sure, but you still run around, holding a button to aim a gun and shoot. That makes it a shooter. Even if it doesn't emphasize it. Shooting always feels awkward and weird to me on consoles and it always ruins my enjoyment of the game. I will wait until it goes on sale in a month or two and pick it up then.

Why does it feel weird "on consoles"? Are you suggesting that pulling an analog trigger to shoot something is weirder than clicking a mouse button? Because that seems odd to me...

I would imagine it's more to do with not having the precision that a mouse would give you. It doesn't matter in most console shooters but you'll feel every missed shot in this game.

Further compounded by the gameplay decision that Joel starts out with a really unsteady aim.

Edited by stryker1121

People around here are more shirty than usual on this QL..combine Patrick and an uber-critically acclaimed game and the assholes and contrarians come out of the woodwork.

Edited by returnofjake

At 39:27 that looks an awful lot like the WWE survivor series logo... weird.

In other news, this game looks fantastic. Waiting for my friend to finish it so they can lend it to me. Lending: the future of videogames.

Posted by crusader8463

@efesell said:

@a_beluga_whale said:

@crusader8463 said:

@adam1808: @lazyaza: There are parts where you don't sure, but you still run around, holding a button to aim a gun and shoot. That makes it a shooter. Even if it doesn't emphasize it. Shooting always feels awkward and weird to me on consoles and it always ruins my enjoyment of the game. I will wait until it goes on sale in a month or two and pick it up then.

Why does it feel weird "on consoles"? Are you suggesting that pulling an analog trigger to shoot something is weirder than clicking a mouse button? Because that seems odd to me...

I would imagine it's more to do with not having the precision that a mouse would give you. It doesn't matter in most console shooters but you'll feel every missed shot in this game.

Further compounded by the gameplay decision that Joel starts out with a really unsteady aim.

Indeed it is. The precision you lose from going from a mouse to the thumbsticks is just too much for me. No matter how sensitive I make the controls it always feels like it takes ten minutes to aim and line up a single shot or that it's zipping around the screen like a crazy person. I have never been able to find a setting that felt right on any console and it makes playing shooters impossible. So in a game where ammo is so important and missing a single shot can mean life and death no matter how good the other parts are that shit is going to get extremely frustrating and drag down the rest of the experience.

Posted by DanTheGamer32

@mbr2: it's called 'suspension of disbelief', you should try it some time...

Edited by tescovee

@ryan texture comparison to rage made me smile, so apropos, by me anyway.

Posted by Ghostiet
@sear said:

@max_cherry said:

Is the ending just the girl shooting the MC in the head because he's been infected?

Probably. SO DEEP AND ARTISTIC

Nope.

Posted by Tesla

This game is awesome.

It's got a little bit of that Uncharted jank, but it's also fun and cinematic in a really immersive way. It's one of those games where I start playing and all the sudden 2 or 3 hours have passed.

Edited by a_beluga_whale

@crusader8463 said:

@efesell said:

@a_beluga_whale said:

@crusader8463 said:

@adam1808: @lazyaza: There are parts where you don't sure, but you still run around, holding a button to aim a gun and shoot. That makes it a shooter. Even if it doesn't emphasize it. Shooting always feels awkward and weird to me on consoles and it always ruins my enjoyment of the game. I will wait until it goes on sale in a month or two and pick it up then.

Why does it feel weird "on consoles"? Are you suggesting that pulling an analog trigger to shoot something is weirder than clicking a mouse button? Because that seems odd to me...

I would imagine it's more to do with not having the precision that a mouse would give you. It doesn't matter in most console shooters but you'll feel every missed shot in this game.

Further compounded by the gameplay decision that Joel starts out with a really unsteady aim.

Indeed it is. The precision you lose from going from a mouse to the thumbsticks is just too much for me. No matter how sensitive I make the controls it always feels like it takes ten minutes to aim and line up a single shot or that it's zipping around the screen like a crazy person. I have never been able to find a setting that felt right on any console and it makes playing shooters impossible. So in a game where ammo is so important and missing a single shot can mean life and death no matter how good the other parts are that shit is going to get extremely frustrating and drag down the rest of the experience.

I guess that makes sense. I play shooters on both PC and console and don't have any of those problems, but to each his own.

Edited by Undeadpool

@ninessc2 said:

So... how did Ellie learn to read huh? HUH?!?

Because major cities, and society, are still largely intact, they just operate under strict martial law.

Edited by Elwoodan

there is a weird disconnect between the models/animations for Joel&Friends vs the zombies though, its a good looking game in parts, but not even close to the Witcher 2 in terms of fidelity.

Edited by scaramoosh

I just think well duh games should be this detailed, only studios like Bungie that create copy and paste level design.

Posted by darkest4

Looks like a higher quality, stealthy, zombie version of Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, which I loved. I'm in.

Edited by Kazzenn

The voice acting in this game is really great especially since Baker showed a lot more range in his voice than he has lately.

Also I fucking love the intro to this game.

Edited by Willin

@returnofjake: Well Survivor Series does take place in Boston in 2013, the year the shit hits the fan...

Posted by ICantBeStopped

I wish zombie fiction would address what happens to animals in the world. Does the virus affect them? If not, where are they? Herbivores go where vegetation is, and predators go where herbivores go. There should be something. Seeing all this overgrowth in the city makes me think other wild things should also be taking over if we don't have the technology to keep them from doing it, other than a dwlindling ammo supply

Posted by cheesy123456789

@quietyith: agree. Only a hardcore consoler like Patrick could convince himself that it looks good. Game looks like junk.

Posted by ICantBeStopped

Also, this game is really amazing. This looks flat compared to what's on my screen, but I'm glad ND was able to do something so different from Uncharted. Each encounter has to be handled with care.

Edited by CakeTeleporter

Great game but not without fault: I disagree with Patrick about the game always letting you know up front when combat is non optional, and the game feels like it's a little too long, a few of the gameplay scenarios repeat a few too many times, it also back loads it's weapon selection.

The second part of the quick look, the Bandit City, is in my opinion the only part of the game that just isn't that good, it goes on too long with only a few changes of scenery, Introduces no new firearms and some of the area design simply doesn't feel that great.

Of course none of this overshadows the quality of gameplay and emotional impact of the story.

Posted by Jedted

This QL needs more Vinny.

Edited by Peanut

I'm glad we can have conversations about great games and their issues at this point. I was happy when that happened with Bioshock Infinite and I'm glad it's happening (to an extent) with Last of Us now. So far I think it's pretty cool, with some minor to major flaws. I'm really not digging the trial and error style of some of the combat scenarios, but I like how the impact of every action you take is felt.

Posted by Mitch0712

The multiplayer is superb; play Survivors mode though. The other mode has respawns and tosses the tone of the game out the window. Knowing you have one life in Survivors mode makes you use more caution.

Online
Posted by Jedted

@patrickklepek: As far as i know, strangling an enemy(human or otherwise) is completely silent and just takes more time. Are you sure when you grab them you wait for the button prompt? I think if you press square immediately that does the quick and loud melee kill.

Edited by Capt_Ventris

That break was a perfect moment for a LOCKDOWN

Posted by tactis

just finished, hell of a game.

Edited by Ares42

@klei: I'd say it's more of a reaction to the fact that reviewers has gotten more and more accepting of mediocre gameplay if there's a great world/story this generation. We see games like Last of Us and Bioshock Infinite get raving reviews, yet they are very clearly single-minded experiences. In many ways it's like being obsessed with graphics, "this game looks amazing 10/10!".

While there's certainly something to be said as for reviewing a game for what it's trying to do it creates a somewhat polarizing effect if the overall perception of the game is dominated by a single aspect of the product. It's sorta like developers and reviewers has agreed upon a "best formula" for games, yet there are many gamers out there that don't find this formula very exhilirating at all.

It's sort of an unfortunate side-effect for these story-driven games, they have to have gameplay and therefore should be judged by that too. Gameplay-driven games on the other hand doesn't need a story or impressive world or immersion-factor or whatever and can be purely judged by gameplay only. And if they happen to have either of them it's mostly just a bonus to the core experience. Story-driven games can't just sail along on mediocre gameplay and consider it a bonus, as it will put a damper on the experience if it's not up to par.

Posted by ICantBeStopped

@ares42: Gameplay isn't mediocre.

Posted by Ares42

@icantbestopped: Well, we could argue about that all day long, but that wasn't really my point :P I was trying to explain that giving games great reviews based on very specific aspects of the game creates a polarizing environment where everyone that thinks that is an important aspect of games agrees with you and people that don't disagree. It's been a very clear trend the last few years that if a game focuses on telling a good story or being a "great experience" it will get praise from the media almost regardless of anything else. It's become the joker-card of great reviews.

Posted by Klei

@ares42 said:

@klei: I'd say it's more of a reaction to the fact that reviewers has gotten more and more accepting of mediocre gameplay if there's a great world/story this generation. We see games like Last of Us and Bioshock Infinite get raving reviews, yet they are very clearly single-minded experiences. In many ways it's like being obsessed with graphics, "this game looks amazing 10/10!".

While there's certainly something to be said as for reviewing a game for what it's trying to do it creates a somewhat polarizing effect if the overall perception of the game is dominated by a single aspect of the product. It's sorta like developers and reviewers has agreed upon a "best formula" for games, yet there are many gamers out there that don't find this formula very exhilirating at all.

It's sort of an unfortunate side-effect for these story-driven games, they have to have gameplay and therefore should be judged by that too. Gameplay-driven games on the other hand doesn't need a story or impressive world or immersion-factor or whatever and can be purely judged by gameplay only. And if they happen to have either of them it's mostly just a bonus to the core experience. Story-driven games can't just sail along on mediocre gameplay and consider it a bonus, as it will put a damper on the experience if it's not up to par.

Thing is, the gameplay is quite good in Last of Us. The combat scenarios, the stealth. I think it's really good. I wouldn't call it '' mediocre '', especially since you will get absolutely destroyed unless you're always on the top of your game.

Posted by Efesell
@klei said:

@ares42 said:

@klei: I'd say it's more of a reaction to the fact that reviewers has gotten more and more accepting of mediocre gameplay if there's a great world/story this generation. We see games like Last of Us and Bioshock Infinite get raving reviews, yet they are very clearly single-minded experiences. In many ways it's like being obsessed with graphics, "this game looks amazing 10/10!".

While there's certainly something to be said as for reviewing a game for what it's trying to do it creates a somewhat polarizing effect if the overall perception of the game is dominated by a single aspect of the product. It's sorta like developers and reviewers has agreed upon a "best formula" for games, yet there are many gamers out there that don't find this formula very exhilirating at all.

It's sort of an unfortunate side-effect for these story-driven games, they have to have gameplay and therefore should be judged by that too. Gameplay-driven games on the other hand doesn't need a story or impressive world or immersion-factor or whatever and can be purely judged by gameplay only. And if they happen to have either of them it's mostly just a bonus to the core experience. Story-driven games can't just sail along on mediocre gameplay and consider it a bonus, as it will put a damper on the experience if it's not up to par.

Thing is, the gameplay is quite good in Last of Us. The combat scenarios, the stealth. I think it's really good. I wouldn't call it '' mediocre '', especially since you will get absolutely destroyed unless you're always on the top of your game.

I'd say when you get into a firefight the gameplay starts to feel really rough, almost nightmarish against Infected. It feels like a design choice meant to punish you for not approaching these scenarios with a little sense and for the most part I'm okay with that... but it makes those scenarios where it's fight or die a real drag.

Those do not seem common, however.

Edited by Ind1gnation

@crusader8463: Yea this definitely doesn't classify as a traditional shooter at least, I think there are more sections where you can just skip or stealth kill all the enemies than where you have to kill everything. I highly recommend this!

Posted by FancyMonkey

... And I just sold my PS3... why didn't I wait?

Edited by Manlyzar

Scared to watch this video. I want everything to be fresh in this game so I'll watch it after I finish the game.

Posted by Zurv

combat is piss like all naughty dog games... grafix are eye cancer too (but that is mostly the fault of the ps3). I'm only a few hours in and hating the hell out of everything about the game - but 5 stars.. i'll try a little bit more

Posted by Nihilius

This game is fantastic just like all of Naughty Dog's other games. Well done Naughty Dog, your games are of pure quality and other developers should take heed.

Edited by Terranova

@jedted said:

@patrickklepek: As far as i know, strangling an enemy(human or otherwise) is completely silent and just takes more time. Are you sure when you grab them you wait for the button prompt? I think if you press square immediately that does the quick and loud melee kill.

Your right strangling doesn't make noise you will only get attention from other enemies doing it if your seen that's why you have a couple of seconds to be able to move out of the line of sight before pressing square to choke them out.

the more noisy melee kills are if you attack head on either punching or using a weapon like a steel pipe, baseball bat, or if for example you throw a brick or bottle at their face which staggers them and you can run in for a one hit kill but that does make noise for others to come investigate especially the clickers.

Edited by OriginalHB504

I wish they didn't talk so much during this quick look in particular. lol

Edited by lordofultima

People talking mess about Uncharted's combat...but it was some of the most refreshing (the 3rd one) I've ever played. Essentially the combat scenerios were puzzles and you have to be mobile from cover to cover to avoid enemies flanking you. AI was an amazing challenge on the hardest difficulty.

Edited by halibut

I agree with most of the reviews out there. It looks, sounds, and PLAYS great. It took me a few hours before the gameplay felt comfortable for me, but after I got it, it just felt awesome.

My advice: once the shit hits the fan, don't be afraid to run away and regroup. If you stay in one place, you'll be overrun pretty quickly.

Edited by Fistfulofmetal

Just finished the game so now I can watch this quicklook!

Interesting, I played on HARD with Listen Mode off.