-
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.
Angry Joe reviews The Last of Us Part II (Story spoilers obv.)
- Thread starter Senua
- Start date
Stuart360
Member
Before the imevitable discrediting of Joe starts from the salty fanboys, Joe lives and breaths videogames, and most people think his scores are too high for games on average. He's really not hard to please, and he really didnt like the game, none of them did. There are tons of Youtube and Streamer reviewers that didnt like the game either, in fact 6/10 is the score i have seen most by these reviewers, many who adored the first game.
Regardless of whether you like the game or not, hopefully this whole shitbang will make the corporate gaming media think twice before laveshing 10/10 across the board for a game for possible ulterior motives.
Regardless of whether you like the game or not, hopefully this whole shitbang will make the corporate gaming media think twice before laveshing 10/10 across the board for a game for possible ulterior motives.
Last edited:
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Thank you for making me feel old as sin lol
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
Dr. Claus
Vincit qui se vincit
Don't forget the ignore thread option is there. If you are getting tired of TLOU2 threads, just block them. I blocked about half of them so far. Made browsing a lot better. There are plenty of people talking that you aren't missing out on anything these days. Last I checked, the first 3 pages are all "today" posts.
Last edited:
Great Hair
Banned
Halo is Back
Member
My biggest problem with the game imo. I can't help but feel like what was even the point of everything? So the writer can ham fist the themes of revenge and forgiveness in a wholly unsatisfying game? Thanks for the 5th grader lesson Neil. Ellie learns to forgive in the end but still gets fucked. There is a reason why you don't fuck up endings.
iorek21
Member
Joe spoke more about the story than anything else, so the review itself feels lacking somehow, but I did enjoy it.
The only thing that I disagree is the argument that Abby's campaign being better is pure manipulation. There are different overall themes around Ellie's and Abby's part; Ellie only cares about revenge, nothing else, and thus the plot mirrors that in some ways (though her campaign has terrible pacing and literally nothing happens). However, Abby's story is more focused on family/loyalty, first you get a taste of how's life with the WLF, then you move to Owen/Mel trying to leave Seattle, then you have Lev and Yara; so good moments like petting dogs, joking and bonding is easier in this kind of setting.
It's not that the writers are trying to manipulate the audience, they just made the worst creative choices possible (the mixed chronology being a MAJOR mistake)
The only thing that I disagree is the argument that Abby's campaign being better is pure manipulation. There are different overall themes around Ellie's and Abby's part; Ellie only cares about revenge, nothing else, and thus the plot mirrors that in some ways (though her campaign has terrible pacing and literally nothing happens). However, Abby's story is more focused on family/loyalty, first you get a taste of how's life with the WLF, then you move to Owen/Mel trying to leave Seattle, then you have Lev and Yara; so good moments like petting dogs, joking and bonding is easier in this kind of setting.
It's not that the writers are trying to manipulate the audience, they just made the worst creative choices possible (the mixed chronology being a MAJOR mistake)
Strategize
Member
Hence why I said I think it needs a Part 3.
It's like watching Empire Strikes Back without seeing what the last bit of hope gets them in ROTJ. Yes, Ellie lost everything except her humanity, but what does she get? What does she do with it? We don't know, the end.
If there's no part 3 and the ending is depressing, then going full out all the way and having her kill Abby would've been better.
Last edited:
Stuart360
Member
He's right about the whole 'forgiveness' angle, and killing is wrong angle at the end. I mean you go through the whole game killing people, not even just killing people, you butcher people in the most raw ways, and then when you get to the 'goal' both Abby and Elle realize killing is wrong?. If it was a Hollywood movie, it would be butchered by the critics.
Halo is Back
Member
Another big problem with the game imo. The placing of story lines is way off. Having us play Abby first, learning her story and her motivations before she Kill's Joel would be more powerful. Having Joel killed off in the first 2 hours gives a feeling of ok......now what?
Hestar69
Member
Yeah, they shoulda done that and made the player kill Joel.
Strategize
Member
They wanted you to hate Abby at first, so doing that wouldn't work for what they wanted.
Last edited:
Strategize
Member
You're ignoring the entire context of her final fight with Abby in comparison to the rest of the people she's killed. Abby is broken and doesn't want to fight her, she just wants to protect Lev. Just like Joel to Ellie.
Compare this to the WLF, Scars and rattlers that are all kill/harm on sight.
DjMystix
Member
This makes so much sense. I've said it several times before that I got influenced by those salty youtubers and skillup (who I really respect a lot). But I wanted to try the game myself. First few hours, I hated the game mainly because of how toxic I was, and then the game finally won me over. having completed it twice, It now is in my list of one of the best games I have played in a long long time.
My take is that it is cool to hate this game on YT and you get more subs. That is why people like skillup and AJ have these kind of senseless reviews. The salty youtubers who got copy struck makes like 10 videos a day bitching about this game and they haven't even played it.
That's just my opinion.
Chromata
Member
Disagree on that last part because then it would have undone all of the important beats the game set up beforehand. The most depressing ending would have been Ellie killing Abby because that would mean she had entirely lost herself and never reconciled with Joel.
Revenge is not a gain in any way nor does it justify all that happened before, so killing Abby accomplishes nothing. It only makes things worse because 1) Abby was already on a path to redemption 2) Lev would have been alone and hurt just like Ellie.
Last edited:
Halo is Back
Member
Still shit story telling for cheap shock value, all for the purpose of saying "HAHA SEEE she is a good person"! The game tries so hard to make you like her. Look! Abby is good to dogs, she plays fetch! You should feel bad we made you kill a dog!
WouldYouKindly
Banned
Abby isn't the only one that bulked up jesus he's packed it the fuck on
Chromata
Member
That would have had a very different affect. If you saw Abby's side beforehand, you would go into Joel's death with context. The point is to witness the event, shocked and angry, then the game challenges you to listen to her side of the story despite your emotions.
Very few games ask this of their player and challenge them in this way. It's a bold thing to do and I can completely understand if a lot of people such as yourself disliked it, but this is the nature of creativity.
It isn't bad writing by any means, it's all intentional, it's just a method of writing you dislike and there's nothing wrong with that.
Last edited:
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
You said he has a good track record
But you don't take his review seriously because he walked off?
is that his fault or the game's fault?
I mean, I'm enjoying the gameplay but the story is dumb and all over the place
And you have people defending it with Star Wars TLJ level of crap.
Maybe the story is not as bad as it seems, but a badly edited film can ruin a good story
trapanesenyc
Banned
This whole review is "this game is written in a way that doesn't follow our head canon." Fan fiction exist for you if you want a story to end a specific way, but this isn't a critique of the quality of the story but the direction of the story which imo isn't fair to the writers. They told an effective story even if it didn't go in a direction that praised the favorites of the first game.
Strategize
Member
I understand that killing Abby would've been the "wrong" move morally I get it.
What I'm saying is under the circumstances that...
1) Part 2 is the ending of TLOU (doubt it).
2) Ellie loses everything regardless.
Then going full on dark depressing nihilism would've been better. As least then it's a story about how Joel's decision drove Ellie to become a bigger monster then he ever was, and her taking the worst parts of him. Sad, but poetic.
Because what we're left with now is no payoff to Ellie not killing her. Ellie doesn't throw away her humanity, but we don't see the positive result of that, just the misery. It just feels unsatisfying without a sequel.
Last edited:
Halo is Back
Member
And we are saying it failed HARD. Why is it so hard to grasp that just because the game director wanted to make you feel something doesn't absolve it from it's poor execution.
gioGAF
Member
I agree with just about everything Angry Joe said. Though the game is even worse in my eyes. I don't understand who Naughty Dog was targeting with this trash. As a fan of the original, I wish I had never played it. There is zero innovation here, and the "new" story (which is bad) just shits all over the existing characters.
TLZ
Banned
The guy explained himself for nearly 50 minutes, and that's not enough?
trapanesenyc
Banned
I somewhat agree with you on the darkest possible ending would have been great for the story. Ellie kills Abby leaving Lev to eventually go on his own revenge tour, continuing the never ending cycle. But I also understand why they had Ellie let her live. She wanted to save what little humanity she had left, and letting her go with Lev was the only way she didn't become a full on monster.
trapanesenyc
Banned
TLZ
Banned
Why?
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I think what happened was LoU1 was supposed to be a one and done game, but the game sold so well ND was forced by Sony brass to make another game. And 5 years from now there will be a part 3.
The gameplay looks no different than part 1, so the money was funneled into cut scenes, visuals, extensive voice acting, and a big twisty story to mask a core game that is really no different than the first one.
What they could have done is use the 7 years of budget and craft better gameplay, have MP releasing at the same time as SP, and put less resources on cut scenes.
Watching a streamer, the game doesn't even seem very long. QXC beat it in 16.5 hours and that involved tons of cut scenes (which he didn't skip) and getting killed a bunch of times. If you exclude the cut scene story bits, I bet he could have finished the game in 12-13 hours.
Given the budget and 300+ employees I think ND has, this game is more suited to a more open world game. Not saying make it a Fallout with 100 repetitive buildings to look for the same scrap metal and medkits, but there is so much more they can do with the game instead of putting so much into graphics and cut scenes and a canned linear story.
Last edited:
Chromata
Member
His review makes it pretty clear that he missed out on a lot of what the story was trying to convey. You can argue that this is the game's fault for not conveying it well, but this is where my problems come in.
Joe walked off certain sections of the game and he just throws criticisms one after another in his rant instead of trying to dissect the issues he had with the game's story. None of this should be done in a professional review.
There were far shorter reviews that also were partially negative which were more detailed. A lot of his points boiled down to "I didn't like this, I didn't like that" without taking the time to think about why things are the way they are. This is what I mean by shallow criticisms, especially if you're going to criticize a game's writing (and personally go after one of its creators).
Last edited:
trapanesenyc
Banned
TLZ
Banned
But I didn't see how they're shallow. I saw explaining his reasons quite well.
PlayerPurple
Member
No more .edu emails only?
Last edited:
Nico_D
Member
I find it is pretty hard to find real and critical reviews of big AAA games from review sites nowadays - especially games which come from certain developers. When something like RDR2 or TLOU2 or Cyberpunk is releasew, you already what the tone of the reviews of the mainstream online media is going to be.
It may be that my taste just differs so much from these sites and their reviewers but sometimes it just seems like the reviews are more about the developer than the game.
Youtube is my go-to source for deep game reviews, Joe is one among them. At least I know they pick the games apart saying honestly what they thought was good and what wasn't. Like Skill Up in his Cyberpunk preview, instead of just gushing about it.
It may be that my taste just differs so much from these sites and their reviewers but sometimes it just seems like the reviews are more about the developer than the game.
Youtube is my go-to source for deep game reviews, Joe is one among them. At least I know they pick the games apart saying honestly what they thought was good and what wasn't. Like Skill Up in his Cyberpunk preview, instead of just gushing about it.
TLZ
Banned
Wait a second. So if I as a customer, dislike a game or movie or TV show's story or writing, you're telling me I have no right to, because I'm not a Pro at writing? C'mon. We all have our opinions.
Chromata
Member
I see what you mean even though I disagree. I can understand not liking why it's open ended as to what she does with her life.
The pieces are definitely there for a TLOU3, I just want to see Naughty Dog move on and try a new IP. I felt like TLOU didn't even need a sequel to begin with.
trapanesenyc
Banned
I never said that or alluded to that. I said he tried to retell the story in his own way for 50 minutes which isn't the job of a critic. Sure you can critique the quality of a story, but when your whole critique is "I'm mad the story didn't go in the direction I wanted to so its bad" is a pretty low quality critique.
Collin
Banned
Meh, this review is poorly reasoned. I loved the game, so call me bias I guess, but I have actively sought out criticism and I’ve actually found a few that are reasonable and fair that make good points against it (even if i ultimately disagree with them) this is one of the worst ones i’ve seen from a “professional” reviewer. Sounds like the ramblings of a confident but stupid middle-schooler.
Ironic he’s gonna discredit the game for lazy writing when this review itself is incredibly lazily written.
What I’ve noticed is my friends more interested in art film adjacent stuff have loved TLOUII but my friends who are more interested in like Marvel-style blockbuster movies have hated it. Not saying any group is better than the other but I can see how if you’re in the latter group (a group I would also put Joe into) and not used to narratives challenging you, I could see how the writing would come off as “bad.” TLOU1 rode a fine line between art game narrative and action game narrative but TLOUII leans way more into art game narrative, which explains the division of opinion in my eyes.
I think when something unusual or challenging happens in a narrative, like trying to seriously challenge the notion of heroes and villain, or killing off a major character in a brutal way, it makes the action Marvel-fed crowd feel odd emotions they’re not used to confronting when enjoying entertainment and they default to thinking it’s poorly made because they’re uncomfortable.
I’ll definitely engage in someone’s opinion on the supposed “bad writing” but Joe’s argument in this video is not good. From others i’ve seen lots of little nitpicks, (people often overuse the word plot hole in these instances) some of which have varying levels of credibility but none i’ve been have been so egregious to ruin the game. You can nitpick anything in that way, but it’s generally reserved for people who generally didn’t like something overall but are bad at articulating specifically why so they default to talking about little things that don’t really matter much.
Ironic he’s gonna discredit the game for lazy writing when this review itself is incredibly lazily written.
What I’ve noticed is my friends more interested in art film adjacent stuff have loved TLOUII but my friends who are more interested in like Marvel-style blockbuster movies have hated it. Not saying any group is better than the other but I can see how if you’re in the latter group (a group I would also put Joe into) and not used to narratives challenging you, I could see how the writing would come off as “bad.” TLOU1 rode a fine line between art game narrative and action game narrative but TLOUII leans way more into art game narrative, which explains the division of opinion in my eyes.
I think when something unusual or challenging happens in a narrative, like trying to seriously challenge the notion of heroes and villain, or killing off a major character in a brutal way, it makes the action Marvel-fed crowd feel odd emotions they’re not used to confronting when enjoying entertainment and they default to thinking it’s poorly made because they’re uncomfortable.
I’ll definitely engage in someone’s opinion on the supposed “bad writing” but Joe’s argument in this video is not good. From others i’ve seen lots of little nitpicks, (people often overuse the word plot hole in these instances) some of which have varying levels of credibility but none i’ve been have been so egregious to ruin the game. You can nitpick anything in that way, but it’s generally reserved for people who generally didn’t like something overall but are bad at articulating specifically why so they default to talking about little things that don’t really matter much.
Last edited:
Allnamestakenlol
Member
10/10 review of a 6/10 game.
Chromata
Member
I can give a few examples, if you'd like. I'll put them in spoilers just in case.
One of his criticisms is that the ending was just to subvert expectations and they didn't give us the payoff which we were owed. This shows that he completely missed key points of the game. Ellie is at odds with herself the entire way through, she's trying to find reasons to fulfill what she feels like she owes Joel (which is evident when she insists on Abby fighting her instead of just killing Abby at the pillar). This was never building to a satisfying "gotcha" revenge payoff, the game spent the vast majority of its runtime doing the exact opposite.
Another criticism he had is that characters had plot armor. He used the example of how Abby didn't kill Ellie and Tommy. Yet he didn't bother to mention that Abby was raised to be a "good" person by her father. She has a conscience and is in conflict with herself. This isn't to say that she's a good person, but it's clear why she decides not to kill them.
Contrast that with other videos which criticize parts of the game while doing their due diligence to analyze the story. That's what I expect from professional reviews.
Last edited:
trapanesenyc
Banned
Him talking about how Joel's death was bad writing showed what direction he was coming from. But I think the game made it clear that in this world no one is "the main" character or special. Multiple important characters died in unspectacular ways because not everyone goes out like a hero. Joel was the protagonist of the game we played from his perspective but in the world he lives in hes just another survivor. I think that what you said about "Marvel" rings true because we want big moments for everything, but what this game made abundantly clear was every group thinks they are the good guys, every person you kill is a named NPC who probably has their own story and we are just seeing it from the perspective of one particular group/characters.
Damageinc103
Member
Lol....Angry Joe for the win.
Strategize
Member
Agreed.
Most of the review is essentially a him trying to create "plot holes" or "out of character moments" most of which don't actually exist in order to validate his dislike. Seems expressing your internal feelings is far more difficult for alot of people than creating an arbitrary bullet point list.
Halo is Back
Member
Never took Joe's opinions on story in games (or movies lmao) seriously but they are entertaining and I can trust him to go into detail about gameplay systems and call out the BS. ACG is still the best video game reviewer imo