Support NeoGAF

[SF Kosmo]

The shit? It is absolutely possible to be surprised, shocked, happy, sad, in abject horror, and more even if you are spoiled by something. I was spoiled by Darth Vader being Luke's father and Aerith's death in FF7, but both scenes still resonated and made me *feel* something because they were that well done (and that is just naming the two most common examples in pop culture - there are hundreds more).

It's possible to have a good experience with something even when you've been spoiled, but that experience is fundamentally different than that of someone who hasn't been spoiled and that matters more in some stories than others. I think it matters a lot in this one.

In particular, the core conceit of this game is

Spoiler

trying to make the player angry enough to empathize with Ellie's rage and revenge campaign, and then to challenge those assumptions by forcing you into a different role.

So it's a narrative that fundamentally relies on misdirection, on tricking the player, in order to confront their own feelings. That can't work when you know it's going to happen.

Another one that comes to mind is Gone Home. People either loved or hated that game because the whole thing hinged on falling for the game's misdirection;

Spoiler

By tricking people into believing it was a horror game, they're put in a mindframe of worry and dread. Meanwhile the game tells a rather grounded story of family drama, and the ending lands as a sort of catharsis after all of this pent up dread and worry, so people that fell for that "trick" really liked it, while people that were spoiled or figured it out didn't get it.

Like I said before, stories aren't just series of events, storytelling involves manipulating the viewer. It's a card trick. When you know what they're doing it doesn't have the same effect.

Just come out with it and be honest with yourself. You don't like Joe's review because he didn't praise the game like you wanted.

There are plenty of valid criticisms of the game. Some people never managed to sympathize with Ellie in the first place, and if that's the case the game can feel like a lecture. Others just thought it was too long to live in such a dreary world, or that it was linear and repetitive. I broadly liked the game, at least as much as I liked the first, but there's plenty of room for criticism.

What Joe did wasn't criticism. It was theater. It was pro-wrestling. It was stupid.

 

[bishopcruz]

Of course we did. He's biased on this game and his problems with the game result him nitpicking things that can go both ways and putting a negative spin on them. His main and probably only actual problem is that he was unable to move past Joel's death. He read the leaked plot point early, he was pissed, made a dumb video and when it happened in game he was doubly pissed. Everything else is just nitpicking and not actual good review.

E.g. oel telling Abby his name, going to their hideout etc. is bad writing. It's not, it's been explained a 100 times how that whole sequence makes sense between a zombie horde, Tommy, Joel and Abby. In fact pretty much all instances of "bad writing" have been explained a 100 times on this forum and (gasp!) in game if he would actually pay attention and not whine about Joel and how he doesn't care about anyone in this story any more. And then there's stupid shit he was toalking on stream like Fireflies were never meant to make the cure so Joel is a hero (conjecture and irrelevant to plot and character motivations btw), there is no cure for fungal infections anyway(wasn't a problem in TLOU1 and THIS GAME IS FICTION!), not killing people cause they are women and not men.

He basically gave 0 chances to the game after 2 hours, he made a stupid video with leaks early on, this particular review is hot garbage. His opinion could be summarised in 2 minutes: I hoped that sequel to TLOU would be a safe adventure and more Ellie/Joel shenanigans until maybe at the end Joel dies and we feel bad. I didn't get what I wanted in my headcanon and I did't give this story any chance, not even tried to empathise with characters or follow the plot so every nitpick which applies to TLOU1 I will apply to TLOU2 to justify how bad it is. It's emotional hijacking pure and simple.

Oh you can explain why it happened, but none of them are particularly good or satisfying.

Just a note, if you think the opening section of the game isn't at the very least extremely messy, then I don't know what to tell you. He actually got into it more later, but in the first two hours of the game there are literally six sites in perspective, with four of them jumping back and forward in time during the same day and ignoring the actual weather patterns that we saw. The entire opening of the game feels like it is rushing to a particular conclusion, because it is RUSHING TO A PARTICULAR conclusion, and Druckman said as much. Part of it also has to do with Jackson being a hub.

Is Tommy being an absolute idiot the worst thing in the world? No, but it is a series of contrivances that build on each other so that by the time we get to the main event anyone who is actually thinking about what is going on is at least questioning what the hell is going on. Troy Baker even tried to fall on his sword in that scene saying he wasn't able to get across that Joel felt he had fucked up there and this wasn't something he would normally do, of course, none of that is in the game.

You are ok with Joel's death? Fine, I was willing to give it a pass to see how the rest of the game played out, spoiler warning, it wasn't worth it.

 

[Eliciel]

This discussion can and will never end well.
What I can say is:
saying the game was bad would be lazy
--and
saying the game was perfect would be lazy.

The truth lies in the middle and both ends have to understand that things could have been done better or perceived differently and space for interpretation is a matter of taste.
I will tell you what my biggest problem was and where I have been conflicted:

The story is brave and the morale that is tried to be established is alluring to say the least.
The intended direction is clearly visible, but the outcome of it all is that I would wish for the complete opposite to what I am seeing in Tlou2 to be the lived reality for humankind and I doubt that it can be a good thing to only wish for that in our world, but portray more and more games with difficult roads and endings.

At the end of the day I would have wanted the game to reflect our dreams rather than our deepest fears - being empty and alone.
At the end I would have wanted a game to make me whole and not to leave me empty and full of despair.
At the end I would have wished for Elli to have the guitar on her back and make it a part of her and not leave it behind, because she couldn't bear it anymore, or connect with it anymore or play it anymore.
All that's left is nothing - an open road with no true direction and with an open meaning.

We should not portray fears more than wishes,
We should not glorify the bad endings as the superior art form.
We have to give hope a fundamental chance in life and in games.
At the end we have to wish for more happy endings in the future, because as I see that the happy endings have become the new "worn out" and bad endings the new "en vogue".
At the end a lot of people are trying to achieve art through bad endings and painful messages these days.

That is why I loved Kratos and his Son in God of War, because he gave direction and hope.
There were hurdles, hindrances, fears, everything, but in the end love got created and trust and a bond that can be build upon-
That's what I would wish for.

I rate TLOU2 a 9.25/10 (equal weight of all)
10/10 graphics (reference level for console)
10/10 sound & score (compares to the best)
8/10 gameplay (repetitive, while improved vs. TLOU1, very good A.I. on harder difficulties)
9/10 story (all of the above included I take away 1 point, they will need to think about my liking to get into the perfect score for me, however, the story still is very well done)

 

[tassletine]

It's possible to have a good experience with something even when you've been spoiled, but that experience is fundamentally different than that of someone who hasn't been spoiled and that matters more in some stories than others. I think it matters a lot in this one.

In particular, the core conceit of this game is

Spoiler

trying to make the player angry enough to empathize with Ellie's rage and revenge campaign, and then to challenge those assumptions by forcing you into a different role.

So it's a narrative that fundamentally relies on misdirection, on tricking the player, in order to confront their own feelings. That can't work when you know it's going to happen.

Another one that comes to mind is Gone Home. People either loved or hated that game because the whole thing hinged on falling for the game's misdirection;

Spoiler

By tricking people into believing it was a horror game, they're put in a mindframe of worry and dread. Meanwhile the game tells a rather grounded story of family drama, and the ending lands as a sort of catharsis after all of this pent up dread and worry, so people that fell for that "trick" really liked it, while people that were spoiled or figured it out didn't get it.

Like I said before, stories aren't just series of events, storytelling involves manipulating the viewer. It's a card trick. When you know what they're doing it doesn't have the same effect.


There are plenty of valid criticisms of the game. Some people never managed to sympathize with Ellie in the first place, and if that's the case the game can feel like a lecture. Others just thought it was too long to live in such a dreary world, or that it was linear and repetitive. I broadly liked the game, at least as much as I liked the first, but there's plenty of room for criticism.

What Joe did wasn't criticism. It was theater. It was pro-wrestling. It was stupid.

Whilst I agree with you on many levels, I think Joe is perfectly entitled to present his opinion in the way that he did. It’s only stupid in this current climate and with hindsight (as the rules change daily).

The one thing I do disagree with you on is that the story can only work through misdirection. There is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that people enjoy a story more if they know in advance what that story is going to be. The reason for this is that laying out the story clearly lets you appreciate it — and if the story is done well enough, you get sucked in by the poetry anyway. The only thing you miss out on is surprise, but what you gain is a whole lot more.

Now, this can’t happen if the author is desperate for shock value (like here) or wants to have the illusion of being a puppet master (also here) but I think in this games’ case it would have benefitted hugely if it at least laid out what the structure of the game was going to be or was more traditional. The idea is fine, but the way it’s told is not.
Just changing the order of events would have helped, as by the time the big switch happens ND aren’t just fighting the plot but years of videogame players hating long cutscenes with dull characters.

The game was insistent on pulling the wool over your eyes and going for the shock however, so that’s the price you pay.
Druckman has stated that his aim was to push you away with the story but then pull you back in with the experience, but I think this is only because he believes he is a master storyteller who is capable of such a feat — but unfortunately he’s not Cormac McCarthy.
The problem isn’t the fact that the game is playing a card trick, it’s that the authors dIsn’t learn any good ones.

 

[tassletine]

Joe's review is the dumbest thing I have ever seen in my life. A guy who spoils the entire game for himself, decides based on those plot bullet points that he hates it and doesn't even want to play it, then proceeds to hate-play it and complain about how it's predictable or the story beats didn't work for him.

Obviously it's a polarizing game regardless, but he didn't even attempt to give it a chance.

I don't get how that translates into a ban, but Era is one of those places where you can get banned just because the mods don't like your face. Assigning significance to it is like trying to figure out why a bird picked your car to shit on today.

He gave it a 6/10 for what it’s worth so did give it a chance, that seems like a fair score to me if you hated the story. He’s also called Angry Joe so has to play that up For entertainment’s sake.

 

[SF Kosmo]

He gave it a 6/10 for what it’s worth so did give it a chance, that seems like a fair score to me if you hated the story. He’s also called Angry Joe so has to play that up For entertainment’s sake.

But you could say all that about ZeroPunctuation, who also does negative reviews in character and who also didn't like The Last of Us, but nevertheless manages to do so while making well reasoned articulate points and not sounding like a drooling moron.

 

[MayauMiao]

He gave it a 6/10 for what it’s worth so did give it a chance, that seems like a fair score to me if you hated the story. He’s also called Angry Joe so has to play that up For entertainment’s sake.

IGN Japan also gave it a 7/10 which is pretty close to what AJ gave but somehow AJ gets a lot of heat for his opinion.

 

[Ritsumei2020]

I have the game but only played a little but. I watched Joe review and enjoyed it. He explains his reasons well.

There is something I want to add here. Joe hated the game. The game itself is also about hate. Joe cant cope with that aspect of the game that requires the player to sympathise with a hated character.

In turn, people on the other site cant sympathise with Joe experience. Joe is the enemy, and he must be hated. If they had really engaged with the themes of the game, they would surely understand the contradiction of praising this game while hating on Joe.

 

[SF Kosmo]

IGN Japan also gave it a 7/10 which is pretty close to what AJ gave but somehow AJ gets a lot of heat for his opinion.

Almost as if they're evaluating the substance of a review and not the numeral at the end.

 

[oagboghi2]

I don't think that anyone doing what Joe did could possibly have the kind of experience the devs intended their players to have. It's a game designed to make you feel sad, angry, worried, to challenge your assumptions, and to surprise. I don't think it's possible for a game to do any of those things for someone who has spoiled the game for themselves and then performance-plays it live with a bunch of friends, hamming up his bullshit to get a reaction.

There is just no universe in which THIS story could land for someone who is doing that.

I am not a fanboy of this game, either, I had mixed feelings about it, although I was generally impressed by the craftsmanship of it. But Joe's review comes off like some Angry Video Game Nerd shit, it's a work, it's not good criticism, it's just entertainment for haters.

The fact that he saw spoilers is irrelevant to the review. Alongside playing with friends. Something people do all the time

Again, you are just looking for reasons to dismiss his opinion because he didn't take it as seriously as you. This is a silly way to approach critique. You're basically saying Joe should go in treating it with high regards and recognizition? Why? Because it's the TLOU.

It has to drop from a 10/10 from your view, than rise to earn one.

Almost as if they're evaluating the substance of a review and not the numeral at the end.

Or that less people follow IGN Japan

 

[SF Kosmo]

The fact that he saw spoilers is irrelevant to the review. Alongside playing with friends. Something people do all the time

Again, you are just looking for reasons to dismiss his opinion because he didn't take it as seriously as you. This is a silly way to approach critique. You're basically saying Joe should go in treating it with high regards and recognizition? Why? Because it's the TLOU.

It's called "good faith." If you review something, you should be giving it the benefit of the doubt and be receptive to what the experience is meant to be.

It has to drop from a 10/10 from your view, than rise to earn one.

I'm not saying he should respect the game because it's great (FWIW, I don't think it's a 10/10), I'm saying that it's a sad, serious, character-driven game and needs to be approached as such. Whether it's good or bad isn't the point, if you're reviewing a game you have to give it a chance to succeed.

 

[oagboghi2]

It's called "good faith." If you review something, you should be giving it the benefit of the doubt and be receptive to what the experience is meant to be.

Good faith? So Joe treating TLOU the same way he treats many other reviews is not acting in good faith? To who? Certainly not the customers, who are looking to Joes opinion for how to spend their money.

Or is to the developers of TLOU2, who apparently deserve special treatment?

I'm not saying he should respect the game because it's great (FWIW, I don't think it's a 10/10), I'm saying that it's a sad, serious, character-driven game and needs to be approached as such. Whether it's good or bad isn't the point, if you're reviewing a game you have to give it a chance to succeed.

Which is what he did. He played the game, same as many others. Again this idea that Joe didn't take it seriously enough or respect the "gravitas" is not how a review should work. The game isn't owed anything. It's a product, he reviewed it and gave his thoughts.

You're arguing for special treatment

 

[SF Kosmo]

Again this idea that Joe didn't take it seriously enough or respect the "gravitas" is not how a review should work. The game isn't owed anything. It's a product, he reviewed it and gave his thoughts.

I wrote a longer response to your points but I deleted it because this quote is really the heart of what we disagree on.

I just don't think games -- any game, not just "exceptional" games -- should be reviewed as a "product" rather than a "work." Games are media, not a consumable. This isn't a bottle of shampoo or a breakfast cereal. Game reviews aren't consumer reports.

If you reviewed a movie, whether something serious like The Godfather or something broad like Avengers, by watching it on your phone on a crowded subway across 10 trips, people would think you're an ass. A lot of people do watch movies this way but it's still a bad review because it doesn't consider the work's intent.

It's not special treatment. I think the intent of every game should be respected.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

I like Angry Joe, I don't agree with his ratings, but his opinion was 100% legit from his point of view and agree with many points but not as annoyed as him. Still Think it deserves 10/10 compared to other games, easily.

 

[GRIEVEZ]

The irony is that the core members of RE are mostly white males, who preaches social justice for minority groups, but yet have no problem banning numerous minority members who don't buy into their far-left dogma.

Dont like talking about politics on game forums. But... What you consider "far left" in the US is considered the center in my country (and no its not Soviet Russia or China lol).

Just a friendly reminder that it all depends on perspective and environment.

 

[Mike O'caine]

The internet is a series of echo chambers. It's a private site so they dont have to platform views they disagree with. Does it make whatever takes that come out of there less nuanced? Absolutely. Does it stoke constant outrage and anger? You bet. Are people addicted to being angry especially when they think their rage is justified? Yes.

From what I've seen of the site, it really is a place filled with very scared, insecure, angry, directionless people who need to feel like they belong to something and are heroes in a culture war. They're not ready to do the work that activism requires like giving up on supporting a company or person you enjoy because of their politics, spending their money on organizations that help vulnerable people, volunteering their time to help vulnerable people.

We live in an age where "I blocked a misogynist on twitter" is something someone can feel makes them a hero of justice and part of a movement for a greater good when at the end of the day they dont genuinely give a shit about what those people are going through. Being "woke" itself is a flimsy costume that many people these days dress themselves in to avoid having to confront the ways in which they actually contribute to human suffering (e.g. buying electronics made by slaves in China, staying silent on predators who have molested women and children because they share similar politics etc)

 

[Mr. PlayStation]

Banning Angry Joe is a bit too much, but his opinion aka his review of the last of us part 2 is something i can easily disagree on

 

[tassletine]

IGN Japan also gave it a 7/10 which is pretty close to what AJ gave but somehow AJ gets a lot of heat for his opinion.

I’d imagine that the Japanese were a bit more reserved

 

[tassletine]

But you could say all that about ZeroPunctuation, who also does negative reviews in character and who also didn't like The Last of Us, but nevertheless manages to do so while making well reasoned articulate points and not sounding like a drooling moron.

Zero punctuation speaks fast, which is why it’s called that. Angry Joe shouts so....
It’s just basic advertising. You can’t go into a horror film and complain that it scares you.

I’m not a fan of Angry Joe but I’m also not a fan of 99% of you tubers simply because they talk so much. Verbose content is popular though for some reason. You always have to go through the trash to find out what they actually mean — but I think its a mistake to jump to conclusions just because someone is shouting (their act) rather than listening to what they are actually saying. The narrative is that Joe hates the game, when actually this isn’t true. His points are mostly valid, despite all the shouting.

 

[evanft]

The best thing about TLOU2 is the amount of seething it's causing.

 

[Esppiral]

Who is that dude? I am supposed to know who he is?

 

[Elektro Demon]

Bunch of lunatics on resetera. Joe should join gaf.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Dont like talking about politics on game forums. But... What you consider "far left" in the US is considered the center in my country (and no its not Soviet Russia or China lol).

Just a friendly reminder that it all depends on perspective and environment.

So your country's "center" is openly racist, regressive, and promotes control of speech and thought?

 

[Shmunter]

So your countries "center" is openly racist, regressive, and promotes control of speech and thought?

North Korean somehow circumventing the firewall.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Bunch of lunatics on resetera. Joe should join gaf.

The invite has been sent by the good Mr. EviLore himself.

 

[carlosrox]

I wrote a longer response to your points but I deleted it because this quote is really the heart of what we disagree on.

I just don't think games -- any game, not just "exceptional" games -- should be reviewed as a "product" rather than a "work." Games are media, not a consumable. This isn't a bottle of shampoo or a breakfast cereal. Game reviews aren't consumer reports.

If you reviewed a movie, whether something serious like The Godfather or something broad like Avengers, by watching it on your phone on a crowded subway across 10 trips, people would think you're an ass. A lot of people do watch movies this way but it's still a bad review because it doesn't consider the work's intent.

It's not special treatment. I think the intent of every game should be respected.

100% agree. Playing games with the lights on and your stupid friends dicking around you isn't the "correct" way to play this.

I haven't finished the game yet but I already consider it to be pretty masterful at the very least in terms of atmosphere, graphics, sound, and of course gameplay. The story seems a bit sloppy but you have to take into account how many people were spoiled on this game's story, thus cheapening many people's true reaction to it, myself included. I'll never get the chance to go in fresh since I was spoiled and that sucks.

 

[Anki]

I am not sure if he will come here, i mean he is so busy with his videos i dont think he will waste time on gaming forums.

 

[MayauMiao]

The invite has been sent by the good Mr. EviLore himself.

I wonder if REE admin sees this and later decides to unban AJ just so to get him to stay in their bubble.

 

[Amiga]

Like I said before, stories aren't just series of events, storytelling involves manipulating the viewer. It's a card trick. When you know what they're doing it doesn't have the same effect.

agree with you there, the game depends on tricks, those tricks were cheap and didn't work. you only do card tricks if you know how to do card tricks.

 

[dcx4610]

I view this faction on the far left like the Jedis in the Star Wars prequels. They were so dogmatic and righteous that they had become authoritarian and blinded. On both sides of the left and right spectrum is authoritarianism.

It took Qui Gon Jinn to rebel against the council and open his mind to gain new perspective. Then it took Luke to bring balance. He brought it to the center left...not the extreme left and he was willing to go right of center when needed. The Yin and the Yang.

Strive to be like Luke...

 

[DryvBy]

Can ERA really be called a forum at this point?

This is the best post I've seen on this site since cloudbush.

 

[SF Kosmo]

agree with you there, the game depends on tricks, those tricks were cheap and didn't work. you only do card tricks if you know how to do card tricks.

Obviously it worked on a lot of people. And probably would have worked on more if not for the leaks. But it's true that this kind of thing is a risk and you're not going to get everyone.

 

[Amiga]

Obviously it worked on a lot of people. And probably would have worked on more if not for the leaks. But it's true that this kind of thing is a risk and you're not going to get everyone.

From what I read from those who liked the game, they didn't care much about the setups. so tricks still didn't work.

 

[Woggleman]

I do not agree with his review and I actually thought he had a number of bad takes but at the end of the day it is his opinion and he has a right to it. If we are to have a free society then we need to allow everybody their opinion. Obviously sending people death threats and anti-semitic tweets is never okay but he didn't do that.