• 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.

Naughty Dog wanted to "change the industry" with The Last of Us

O

OneEyedKing

Member
Scooter said:
Great way of arguing, everything is strawman and denial denial denial. Even though we have a crapload of examples even in this forum with feminists obsessing about regulating sex in the media because they consider it degrading for women.
Click to expand...

You have a supreme misunderstanding of feminism and the issues they take on.

Feminists celebrate female sexuality but they resist male control and manipulation over it. You want to know why they want to "regulate" it in the media? Because its portrayals in the media have consistently existed as a male-controlled exploit that fosters unrealistic, repressive, and even damaging expectations for them. It often involves submissive and one-dimensional roles wherein they are less an actual person and more of a prize for male characters (and, by extension the audience) while also creating severe issues relating to body image and self-esteem/self-worth. When approached properly it does not degrade women. Unfortunately, it has degraded them frequently since it isn't approached properly and since there are enormous double standards regarding male and female sexuality especially regarding the agency women possess over their own bodies (consider slut-shaming and victim blaming). This constant over-sexualization and objectification is harmful because it normalizes these beliefs and behaviors within a culture, especially when they are so prevalent in all media all the time.

There is NOTHING wrong with portraying female sexuality - if anything it is worth portraying. But it is worth portraying meaningfully and realistically. The difference lies in the male-led over-sexualization that has pervaded the media for decades which has served as nothing more than prurient enticement without actually considering the female perspective or experience.

And trying to equate that to male sexualization is completely misguided since the experiences of each are completely different, especially when women are met with these inane portrayals on a more consistent basis and from a much younger age, all of which reinforces the wrong ideas of sex and "expected" behavior of them. Of course men also face problems with these portrayals as well, especially when it encourages them to uphold these beliefs, but also when it denies them a superior understanding of actual female sexuality and not the one that's marketed to sate the appetites of teenage hormones.

As for the topic at hand, I loved the portrayal of Ellie in The Last of Us and while she is not the first "strong female character" out there, at the very least she's another recent example of developers pushing the medium in a better direction.
 
C

ccctrlaltdelete

Banned
I'd think it'd be pretty boring if every game had the same realistic look. Exaggerating proportions helps makes things more interesting imo.
I asked my sister what she thought about these topics in games and she said she would never play games if the characters weren't sexy.
Burly men and busty women makes things more interesting because its not the norm, it's not realistic.. I mean aren't most of us playing games technically as an escape from reality?
 
S

Scooter

Banned
meijiko said:
When you look at one female character in a game and see that she's sexualized, there's nothing wrong with that. When you look at a whole group of females in games and see that a good majority of them are sexualized, that's a problem. Aside from the lack of variety, it paints a picture of "women are supposed to be this way," which is particularly harmful as a trend.
Click to expand...


Even though I pointed out the problem with feminists repeatedly you still focus on sexuality, this is why we're never going to agree on anything. Again, I see nothing wrong with characters male of female being completely shameless about their sexuality, either it's one character or a million. It harms noone other than the conservative movement that hates that society is getting more sexually liberated.

It paints the picture that women are supposed to not be ashamed of their sexuality and even flaunt it? It's a pretty terrible assumption that you're making there since it dangerously resembles the argument about violence and videogames but even if it were true (it isn't) I'd have no problem with it.
 
E

Elway7Sharpe84

Banned
OneEyedKing said:
You have a supreme misunderstanding of feminism and the issues they take on.

Feminists celebrate female sexuality but they resist male control and manipulation over it. You want to know why they want to "regulate" it in the media? Because its portrayals in the media have consistently existed as a male-controlled exploit that fosters unrealistic, repressive, and even damaging expectations for them. It often involves submissive and one-dimensional roles wherein they are less an actual person and more of a prize for male characters (and, by extension the audience) while also creating severe issues relating to body image and self-esteem/self-worth. When approached properly it does not degrade women. Unfortunately, it has degraded them frequently since it isn't approached properly and since there are enormous double standards regarding male and female sexuality especially regarding the agency women possess over their own bodies (consider slut-shaming and victim blaming). This constant over-sexualization and objectification is harmful because it normalizes these beliefs and behaviors within a culture, especially when they are so prevalent in all media all the time.

There is NOTHING wrong with portraying female sexuality - if anything it is worth portraying. But it is worth portraying meaningfully and realistically. The difference lies in the male-led over-sexualization that has pervaded the media for decades which has served as nothing more than prurient enticement without actually considering the female perspective or experience.

And trying to equate that to male sexualization is completely misguided since the experiences of each are completely different, especially when women are met with these inane portrayals on a more consistent basis and from a much younger age, all of which reinforces the wrong ideas of sex and "expected" behavior of them. Of course men also face problems with these portrayals as well, especially when it encourages them to uphold these beliefs, but also when it denies them a superior understanding of actual female sexuality and not the one that's marketed to sate the appetites of teenage hormones.
Click to expand...

But they will NEVER be able to "regulate" it in the media because it involves too much money, for which I am thankful. It's pretty much a moot point

The most they can do is sit in various corners of the internet, whining and complaining, while we will continue to enjoy boobage, cleavage, ass shots, and provocative outfits w/o the guilt tripping.
 
R

razoftblend

Member
Dark Octave said:
So basically the female has to be 14 years old in order to not be viewed and designed in a sexual manner? :p

I personally didn't find anything attractive about Chloe even if they tried. And the guy from LoU is Drake aged 15 or 20 years. But I guess I see what you're saying though.
Click to expand...

There can be girls who have a nice body at that age. Being older can give them a better body, but Chloe was given a very sexualized look, front and butt. The problem I see with his comment is that he's claiming to change something by not sexualizing women, but they do have those characters in theor games, and Ellie is a kid agewise, so they really didn't have much of a choice there. In turn, his comment comes off as arrogant.
 
S

Scooter

Banned
OneEyedKing said:
You have a supreme misunderstanding of feminism and the issues they take on.

Feminists celebrate female sexuality but they resist male control and manipulation over it. You want to know why they want to "regulate" it in the media? Because its portrayals in the media have consistently existed as a male-controlled exploit that fosters unrealistic, repressive, and even damaging expectations for them. It often involves submissive and one-dimensional roles wherein they are less an actual person and more of a prize for male characters (and, by extension the audience) while also creating severe issues relating to body image and self-esteem/self-worth. When approached properly it does not degrade women. Unfortunately, it has degraded them frequently since it isn't approached properly and since there are enormous double standards regarding male and female sexuality especially regarding the agency women possess over their own bodies (consider slut-shaming and victim blaming). This constant over-sexualization and objectification is harmful because it normalizes these beliefs and behaviors within a culture, especially when they are so prevalent in all media all the time.

There is NOTHING wrong with portraying female sexuality - if anything it is worth portraying. But it is worth portraying meaningfully and realistically. The difference lies in the male-led over-sexualization that has pervaded the media for decades which has served as nothing more than prurient enticement without actually considering the female perspective or experience.

And trying to equate that to male sexualization is completely misguided since the experiences of each are completely different, especially when women are met with these inane portrayals on a more consistent basis and from a much younger age, all of which reinforces the wrong ideas of sex and "expected" behavior of them. Of course men also face problems with these portrayals as well, especially when it encourages them to uphold these beliefs, but also when it denies them a superior understanding of actual female sexuality and not the one that's marketed to sate the appetites of teenage hormones.

As for the topic at hand, I loved the portrayal of Ellie in The Last of Us and while she is not the first "strong female character" out there, at the very least she's another recent example of developers pushing the medium in a better direction.
Click to expand...


Following your extremely flawed logic bolded above the only solution to that "problem" is gender segregation in the media since any portrayal of female sexuality by men is inherently problematic unless it's regulated by feminists. And why are you assuming that your group only knows the true standard of "realistic" female sexuality?

In a world where human sexuality and pop-culture play a game of chicken and egg how the fuck have feminists discovered the true standard of female sexuality?
 
M

meijiko

Member
Scooter said:
Following your extremely flawed logic bolded above the only solution to that "problem" is gender segregation in the media since any portrayal of female sexuality by men is inherently problematic unless it's regulated by feminists. And why are you assuming that your group only knows the true standard of "realistic" female sexuality?

In a world where human sexuality and pop-culture play a game of chicken and egg how the fuck have feminists discovered the true standard of female sexuality?
Click to expand...

Can I just ask one question? Do you dislike the character of Ellie? Would you hate to live in a world where there were more characters like her?
 
O

OneEyedKing

Member
Elway7Sharpe84 said:
But they will NEVER be able to "regulate" it in the media because it involves too much money, for which I am thankful. It's pretty much a moot point

The most they can do is sit in various corners of the internet, whining and complaining, while we will continue to enjoy boobage, cleavage, ass shots, and provocative outfits w/o the guilt tripping.
Click to expand...

What an unfortunate perspective you have.

Scooter said:
Following your extremely flawed logic bolded above the only solution to that "problem" is gender segregation in the media since any portrayal of female sexuality by men is inherently problematic unless it's regulated by feminists. And why are you assuming that your group only knows the true standard of "realistic" female sexuality?

In a world where human sexuality and pop-culture play a game of chicken and egg how the fuck have feminists discovered the true standard of female sexuality?
Click to expand...

Please do not make false assumptions about what I said and put words in my mouth to reach a simplistic conclusion. Not all depictions of female sexuality by men are poor and demeaning. You have to have a poor grasp of culture, however, if you do not realize that this has been the case for decades. Various media from books to TV to film to video games have been consistently male-dominated, from content creators to publishers, and they have constantly been guilty of these portrayals while women have struggled to be as influential within the same fields (though of course there are successful women in there, but there are still roadblocks in the way). Yes, there have been men who have tackled female sexuality and female characters in general meaningfully and commendably, but that doesn't mean the problem has vanished.

Also "feminists" aren't some super exclusive club or "group." It's sad that the term has developed a negative connotation when all it emphasizes is gender equality. Anyone who believes in that and empathizes with women based on the demonstrable inequality they face should be proud to call themselves a feminist. It isn't about being better than men or putting men down, it's about being equal and it benefits men just as much as it does women. It's like calling someone a non-racist and acting like it's an offensive term or describes some fringe group that doesn't belong in the majority. And yes, there are obviously disagreements within feminist theory, but the notion of portraying honest female sexuality and experiences isn't some controversial idea. It's simply about recognizing that women can be unique and capable as well. There isn't one simple "all female sexuality is X" standard just like there isn't a simple "all male sexuality is X" rule. Sexuality is fluid and novel. The fact that female sexuality (and even male sexuality to a large extent, though not nearly as much) continues to be so black-and-white within the media though means this is still an issue worth discussing, exploring, and changing.

And at the very least is there really anything wrong with wanting more variety and diversity among characters? It's pretty tiring being exposed to the same old characterizations and tropes over and over.
 
O

Owwari

Banned
Neiteio said:
Just wanted to say TLoU is an excellent game and not nearly as pretentious as the game's creators now conspire to make it sound.
Click to expand...

Avatar: Luigi Hat, W101 mask.
Yep, a completely objective remark right?

Pesonally, I don't even mind if ND acts pretentious about TLoU, they made an amazing NEW IP in an industry full of rehashes and HD remakes.
 
S

Scooter

Banned
meijiko said:
Can I just ask one question? Do you dislike the character of Ellie? Would you hate to live in a world where there were more characters like her?
Click to expand...

Loved the character even though it has little to do with sexuality or gender, she was a strong character that had impressive character development. Do I want more strong female characters? Why not, afterall I love strong independent women in many ways. I'm not going to shame developers into making them though or make demands as if I'm representing the male gender like feminists do for theirs.

Furthermore, strong female characters and sexualized female characters aren't mutually exclusive and this can't be stressed enough. Many feminists are under the wrong impression that sexualized female characters are somehow degrading or that they can't be strong or that even if they're strong they're being compromised by sexualization. It's bullshit of the highest order and another issue where conservatives and feminists agree.
 
R

razoftblend

Member
HorizonBrave said:
Avatar: Luigi Hat, W101 mask.
Yep, a completely objective remark right?

Pesonally, I don't even mind if ND acts pretentious about TLoU, they made an amazing NEW IP in an industry full of rehashes and HD remakes.
Click to expand...

I've never understood why someone's choice of avatar should make their opinions any more/less valid than others.

Not all games should follow a similar design concept. Variety is good, but some people in here seem to think everyone should follow ND's desogn approach, includong devs who make more dynamic, open-ended games.
 
O

Omnistalgic

Member
Some critical folks we have here...lol

if the guys says, "I know it sounds pretentious" doesn't that allow room to believe he wasn't trying to be pretentious? I'm sure folks in the industry acknowledge character designs even moreso than us. Only problem I have with the webz, I think we're too critical with printed information. If that interview was a conversation, it'll likely sound very different.
 
R

Reishiki

Banned
faceless007 said:
I limited my search to the last month but they've been quiet. Of course, now I'm curious to know what extremist vile feminists you're referring to who get greater media attention. We all know who the Phelps are by name.
Click to expand...

I believe we're talking about different things here.

The Phelps clan make news, but nobody is silly enough to actually give them column inches in a national newspaper (Or indeed, making one of them the liason to the American Bar Association's Committee on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) for them to sprout bigotry.

faceless007 said:
Well now I don't know who or what exactly you're referring to.
Click to expand...

Something like this.

faceless007 said:
It might be more more constructive if you were more specific as to what you want anyone to do about them.
Click to expand...

I wish people would stop listening to them and thinking they might actually have good ideas. Like it or not, the fact that they continue to peddle this crap under 'feminism' makes people listen.
 
A

AniHawk

Member
man. the last of us was really good and i liked the characters, gameplay, world, and pretty much everything about it after the initial first few hours. but holy crap druckmann and company's ego makes it impossible to like the company behind the game.
 
U

Uno Venova

Banned
Haha damn, no employee at ND should never talk about their ambitions ever again. People on forums want your entire companies head.
 
G

GRIP

Member
AniHawk said:
man. the last of us was really good and i liked the characters, gameplay, world, and pretty much everything about it after the initial first few hours. but holy crap druckmann and company's ego makes it impossible to like the company behind the game.
Click to expand...

because of one comment?
 
D

Dash Kappei

Not actually that important
I actually think Joel is more if a breakthrough than Ellie, at least as far as AAA productions go.
So fucking refreshing, they even worked around big cliches (dead daughter, changed man, sense of protection etc.) to make a non-clichè protagonist.
 
G

GuessMyUserName

Member
HorizonBrave said:
Avatar: Luigi Hat, W101 mask.
Yep, a completely objective remark right?

Pesonally, I don't even mind if ND acts pretentious about TLoU, they made an amazing NEW IP in an industry full of rehashes and HD remakes.
Click to expand...

... Are you saying his post is biased against ND despite... praising their game?

Even in this post you're hardly disagreeing with him by saying "well whatever they're allowed to be pretentious...". What are you trying to discredit from that post for liking Wonderful Luigi Tits? All I'm seeing here is a defensive kneejerk reaction from someone who has a problem with ND being called pretentious even when they agree about it.
 
A

AniHawk

Member
GRIP said:
because of one comment?
Click to expand...

no.

druckmann said:
We’re trying to say something about human beings and how they exist. Now necessarily just in this setting, but in every setting. We try so hard at Naughty Dog to push things and then games come out that are fun and exciting and get visceral things right, but to read in reviews that they have an amazing story is disheartening to us because we work so hard at it.
Click to expand...

balestra said:
We're trying to move the medium of video games into an area elevated in the same manner of respect of film. We want to redefine what our medium is even called. 'Video game' is not an accurate name anymore. It is not necessarily a game with rules and a winner and a loser. It's an experience.
Click to expand...

these people view themselves as saviors of the video game industry. it's sad, but a bit amusing to watch. it's been happening for a long time though (that's where the sad part comes in). here's jason rubin comparing jak ii to super mario sunshine:

We've moved the entire atmosphere of the game to a higher age group. Gamers like me are still playing. I'm 33 and what I want now is very different from what I wanted ten years ago. Ten years ago you didn't have the choice to play Grand Theft Auto. You played Mario because Mario was what's available.

Well, Pandora's box has opened and younger kids want to play what older kids are playing and older kids are playing Grand Theft Auto.

This isn't about saving a princess; it's about revenge, betrayal. You might think that doesn't sound original, but think of Mario going out for revenge, or Sonic. It's not a character action thing to do.

---

It definitely redoubled my belief that you have to push the genre forward, because when I put that game in and expected Miyamoto greatness, and the characters came out saying: "Bloop! Bloop! Bloop!" I was like, that is 1997. I don't need that in 2003.

Give me a character with a voice and a personality, and more of a cinematic experience. Don't give me Mario from 15 years ago. They just haven't moved on; that's not their focus. I think its very hard for Miyamoto to both run Nintendo - which he does to a certain extent - and get into the game design.
Click to expand...
 
C

Contra11

Banned
TLOU is a great and very polished game .. but its doesnt have anything revolutionary

like RE4 or Super Mario 64

Uncharted series in the other hand changed the industry "in a bad way"
 
V

Vitor711

Member
Dark Octave said:
So basically the female has to be 14 years old in order to not be viewed and designed in a sexual manner? :p

I personally didn't find anything attractive about Chloe even if they tried. And the guy from LoU is Drake aged 15 or 20 years. But I guess I see what you're saying though.
Click to expand...

But they didn't make just 1 awesome non-sexualised female character, they made 3 (with Tess and Marlene included). And they hardly had unrealistic proportions.
 
M

Mory Dunz

Member
Haven't played Last of Us.

But isn't the girl just a kid? She's not above 16 or 17 right?

I would hope she wasn't sexualized...
 
B

Bundy

Banned
AniHawk said:
These people view themselves as saviors of the video game industry.
Click to expand...
Actually, they don't.
AniHawk said:
it's sad, but a bit amusing to watch. it's been happening for a long time though (that's where the sad part comes in). here's jason rubin comparing jak ii to super mario sunshine:
Click to expand...
It isn't sad, because they are somehow right. Some gamers aren't interested in Mario games after a certain age and want a story/developed character in their games.
Shocking, right?
You know what is actually sad? You shitting on the Jak franchise + Jason Rubin + somethimes even on current Naughty Dog for nearly over a decade now.
Let it finally go.
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
S

Scooter

Banned
OneEyedKing said:
Please do not make false assumptions about what I said and put words in my mouth to reach a simplistic conclusion. Not all depictions of female sexuality by men are poor and demeaning. You have to have a poor grasp of culture, however, if you do not realize that this has been the case for decades. Various media from books to TV to film to video games have been consistently male-dominated, from content creators to publishers, and they have constantly been guilty of these portrayals while women have struggled to be as influential within the same fields (though of course there are successful women in there, but there are still roadblocks in the way). Yes, there have been men who have tackled female sexuality and female characters in general meaningfully and commendably, but that doesn't mean the problem has vanished.

Also "feminists" aren't some super exclusive club or "group." It's sad that the term has developed a negative connotation when all it emphasizes is gender equality. Anyone who believes in that and empathizes with women based on the demonstrable inequality they face should be proud to call themselves a feminist. It isn't about being better than men or putting men down, it's about being equal and it benefits men just as much as it does women. It's like calling someone a non-racist and acting like it's an offensive term or describes some fringe group that doesn't belong in the majority. And yes, there are obviously disagreements within feminist theory, but the notion of portraying honest female sexuality and experiences isn't some controversial idea. It's simply about recognizing that women can be unique and capable as well. There isn't one simple "all female sexuality is X" standard just like there isn't a simple "all male sexuality is X" rule. Sexuality is fluid and novel. The fact that female sexuality (and even male sexuality to a large extent, though not nearly as much) continues to be so black-and-white within the media though means this is still an issue worth discussing, exploring, and changing.

And at the very least is there really anything wrong with wanting more variety and diversity among characters? It's pretty tiring being exposed to the same old characterizations and tropes over and over.
Click to expand...

You specifically said "Feminists celebrate female sexuality but they resist male control and manipulation over it" which was consistent with the rest of your post, I didn't take anything out of context. Now regarding your post, the fact that there aren't many men or women tackling female sexuality in a meaningful way in mainsteam media has nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with the superficiality in media. Rarely a facet of human nature is tackled meaningfully especially in games that are still in their infancy as far as stories and characters are concerned. So this is a completely different subject compared to what we're discussing.

Also, as I said before women being "capable and unique" has nothing to do with sexualization. An extremely sexy female character can be as unique and capable as a completely sexless one and btw the mere fact that you mentioned that in a discussion about sexuality proves what I was saying before about certain feminists assuming that sexuality somehow compromises female characters.
 
R

razoftblend

Member
Bundy said:
Actually, they don't.

It isn't sad, because they are somehow right. Some gamers aren't interested in Mario games after a certain age and want a story/developed character in their games.
Shocking, right?
You know what is actually sad? You shitting on the Jak franchise + Jason Rubin + somethimes even on current Naughty Dog for nearly over a decade now.
Let it finally go.
Click to expand...

He's not "shitting" on those. He's bringing up some examples of how they might think too highly of themselves. Just because you're older now doesn't mean you can enjoy fames woth little to no story. Story was not the reason people like Mario, and there story-driven games back then and not just Mario. Story-driven games are ND's specialty, but it doesn't mean everyone should follow after them in that regard.

Like others have said, UC did change the industry for the worst in some aspects. Not every game fits that style. If it did, then I'd like to see ND keep that story telling in a big, open world game, cinematics and all without diluting the story. If they did thay, then they'd be close to changing something. As it stands, they're only following industry standards.
 
N

Neiteio

Member
HorizonBrave said:
Avatar: Luigi Hat, W101 mask.
Yep, a completely objective remark right?

Pesonally, I don't even mind if ND acts pretentious about TLoU, they made an amazing NEW IP in an industry full of rehashes and HD remakes.
Click to expand...
Uh, what? I'm saying TLoU is an EXCELLENT game. How would my avatar undermine that? Have you not seen my one billion and one threads about PS3 and PC games? TLoU is my current GOTY, for chrissakes.
 
B

Bundy

Banned
razoftblend said:
He's not "shitting" on those. He's bringing up some examples of how they might think too highly of themselves. Just because you're older now doesn't mean you can enjoy fames woth little to no story. Story was not the reason people like Mario, and there story-driven games back then and not just Mario. Story-driven games are ND's specialty, but it doesn't mean everyone should follow after them in that regard.
Click to expand...
I guess you haven't seen his posts regarding Jak/Rubin in the past?
Yes, he is shitting on them.
Why are they thinking "too highly" on themselves?
They try to do stuff better than others and they did/do! Storytelling in games, the cinematic feel, etc. They tried to show females in games, which are non-sexualized (Elena, Tess, Sarah, Ellie, Marlene, etc.) and they're openly talking about it. Just because they are openly talking about it = they're thinking "too highly" about themselves now? Actually, not really!
More devs should talk about it openly. Maybe then, it will get better in the future.

Like others have said, UC did change the industry for the worst in some aspects. Not every game fits that style. If it did, then I'd like to see ND keep that story telling in a big, open world game, cinematics and all without diluting the story. If they did thay, then they'd be close to changing something. As it stands, they're only following industry standards.
Click to expand...
No, because their storytelling is currently one of the best if not THE BEST in the gaming industry. They don't need to tell such a story in a "big/open-world game", because their current/favourite genre are action-adventures, which are simply more linear than an open-world / inFAMOUS-like game.
Now they have to tackle a different genre they don't like just to prove something? Nah!
As you have said, UC changed the industry a bit. And then ....suddenly.... they are only following the industry standard, according to you? What?
It's not Naughty Dog's fault that copy-cats and/or talentless devs like (for example) the Resident evil 5/6 teams are copying them. Resident Evil (which WAS a survial horror game) is now a "Horror-Entertainment Game", according to Capcom. If you remember their E3 trailers back then, it was.... actually a "Horror-Uncharted".
It looked horrible! And this is Naughty Dog's "faulty"?
Sorry bro, not really!
 
N

Neiteio

Member
Mory Dunz said:
Just look at that Luigi hat. The bias is overwhelming.

:)
Click to expand...

ascii42 said:
[QUOTE GuessMyUserName;83176277]Wonderful Luigi Tits/QUOTE]

Not a phrase I ever expected to see.
Click to expand...
Sarcasm, I hope? :)

So far my Top Five Games of the Year look something like:

- The Last of Us (PS3)
- Grand Theft Auto V (PS3)
- Puppeteer (PS3)
- Metal Gear Rising (PS3)
- Fire Emblem Awakening (3DS)

I haven't played TW101 yet. I just picked it up with Rayman Legends and ZombiU in Target's B2G1 sale.

At any rate, anyone who's read my shit before knows I love games on all platforms. Avatars are a terrible metric for assuming taste.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Naughty Dog Creative Head Neil Druckmann to Receive NYVGCC Legend Award | Past winners include Phil Spencer, Hideo Kojima, and Reggie Fils-Aimé
News 2
64
3K
Majormaxxx replied
Naughty Dog's next big single player game is not The Last of Us: Part 3.
Game Dev 2 3 4
187
12K
mckmas8808 replied
What would a Naughty Dog Sci-Fi game look like?
2 3
107
4K
S0ULZB0URNE replied
‘The Last Of Us’: Isabela Merced Cast As Dina In Season 2 Of HBO Series
2 3
109
10K
DrFigs replied
The Last of Us Part II Director doesn't understand relaunching critiscism.
Game Dev 2 3 4 5
245
15K
Danjin44 replied
Top Bottom