The Last Of Us

[Dodsy]

Just finished the story of this amazing game (is it fair to call it a masterpiece?). Don't want to post spoilers in the first post but just wondered what other boardies thought?

If you own a PS3 and haven't played it yet you really need to, your not going to regret it.

[radiator]

I've heard so much good stuff about it that I'm tempted, but I get worried hearing everyone mention 'stealth' and 'the story is amazing'...

Basically, I couldn't care less about game narratives - I skip cutscenes in pretty much everything.

I also get bored in singleplayer games that are too on rails and don't let you explore.

Would I still like it?

[Professor Bear]

Loved this, even though my ADD was strained with cut scenes that went on for almost four whole minutes in places.  And what an ending!  You get closure all right, but if you're one of these arcade gamers who needs everything spelled out for you, you're pretty much fucked.
I liked how there were roughly three points in the game where it could have ended (the University campus, the end of the winter levels, the giraffes) yet kept going anyway for at least another few hours, making it feel less like a film and more like a season of a tv show, and then when it makes you [spoiler]murder the people trying to save the world[/spoiler] you have absolutely no qualms about doing so - at least I didn't - because you're so invested in Joel as a character and know this is the only thing he can do regardless of the consequences.  Did you also notice that the final levels are the first few levels only inverted?  [spoiler]You start out as the girl, then Joel's carrying you as he's on the run, then she's dead and Joel is a walking dead man, but at the end, the reverse happens[/spoiler] - not subtle, but the symmetry is a welcome nod to the characters finally moving on from their survivor's guilt, also seen in the game when Joel keeps touching his watch or in the giraffe motif.

My main gripe is with the chapter select afterwards when you reload a game to play an earlier level and then all the levels you unlocked after that are no longer available, and your character build has been reset, too, which is fine for a new game+ playthrough, but not a collectible/trophy cleanup - oh, and it sure does make you work like fuck for your cheevos, as I played through the game and only got two trophies, one of which was for finishing the game on the lowest difficulty.
Brilliant, all the same.  A watermark for modern gaming.

[Dodsy]

Going from what you've just said Radiator I'm guessing you'd hate it, which is a shame. It's a very character driven piece. You do get to explore but in a very linear way, you'll always end up in the same place.

T.Bear if you think 4min cut scenes are bad don't try mgs4, if I remember correctly they reach 90minutes at least twice.
I know what you mean about it having several ending points but glad it just kept going. The winter section is one of the greatest scene in gaming. It was so intense, to the point where it actually "influenced" my dreams on the night lol.
The bit with the giraffes raised a smile as did several other small pieces that can't really be classed as scenes but the game would be lacking without them.
It definitely stays with you and think it will for a long time to come yet...

(Hope they don't do a sequel though, can't help but think it would only take away from the original)

[Professor Bear]

I can actually sit through long cut scenes, I just rarely want to because the writing and acting are so clumsy and painful to watch - there's really little excuse for that kind of thing these days when games have budgets and profit margins akin to the average movie, and the makers go out of their way to chase the look and feel of a movie but for some reason don't think writing and acting in their projects are worth improving.  MGS4 is a great example - lengthy cutscenes but the writing and acting in them are fucking horrible to the point that even in a room alone I still feel embarrassed to be watching them - and I've willingly watched Power Rangers for entire seasons at a time (though anything after RPM can go fuck itself).

There's supposedly prequel material coming out about the doomed family in the sewers whose remains you encounter when you're with Henry and Sam, but that will likely be DLC.  I'm quite looking forward to it as I found the online multiplayer to be a bit of an unforgiving grind.

[allied72]

Did not realise this was just on the PS3, was looking forward to it, also looking forward to the tie in
http://www.amazon.com/The-Last-Faith-Erin-Hicks/dp/1616552123
i wonder is this the prequel material you mentioned Professor James T Bear, and will it matter that I haven't played the game, hope not..

[Professor Bear]

The tie-in comic is not great, and contradicts the game in places.  It doesn't have the feel or look of the game, which I think defeats the idea of a tie-in even if it's hardly a new problem for licenced works (the Star Trek comics set in the movie continuity being the worst and most recent examples I can think of).
If you like Hicks' other comics, though, you might enjoy it, as it is more of the same, only without characters going WAAAH and waving their arms.

[allied72]

i must admit I am a fan of Hicks, not sure why, I know what you mean about the waving arms etc. Thanks for the heads up, might be more inclined to check it out as i don't think I'll get to play the game

[radiator]

I can actually sit through long cut scenes, I just rarely want to because the writing and acting are so clumsy and painful to watch - there's really little excuse for that kind of thing these days when games have budgets and profit margins akin to the average movie, and the makers go out of their way to chase the look and feel of a movie but for some reason don't think writing and acting in their projects are worth improving.  MGS4 is a great example - lengthy cutscenes but the writing and acting in them are fucking horrible to the point that even in a room alone I still feel embarrassed to be watching them - and I've willingly watched Power Rangers for entire seasons at a time (though anything after RPM can go fuck itself).

I tend to think that regardless of the quality of writing and acting, traditional forms of storytelling media just have so many inherent advantages over games as a storytelling medium. Characters in films don't keep dying and coming back to life every five minutes, rewinding the narrative every time. Supporting characters in films don't get stuck in bits of scenery, or walk on the spot, or make bizarre statements at the wrong moments. Or get shot repeatedly in the face and survive. Or repeat the same line of dialogue over and over again, all while the lead character jumps 7 ft in the air while spinning round and round in circles. Outside of 1980s action films, protagonists don't have to slaughter literally hundreds of people per hour to keep things interesting. We're not expected to care if a character in a film dies at a predestined point, even though they've clearly demonstrated that they were 100% invincible up to that arbitrary point in the narrative.

I just think games should concentrate on being games - fun things to be played with - rather than trying to emulate films or TV. That isn't to say games can't do atmosphere incredibly effectively, but that's a different thing.

The only game I could think of off the top of my head that has a genuinely good narrative, good acting performances and good dialogue - Half Life 2 - is primarily a game, a sandbox of toys like the gravity gun, or physics puzzles, and has hardly any cutscenes at all. The story isn't intrusive.

Most of my fondest gaming memories - stuff like Perfect Dark multiplayer, or mucking about in GTA (any version), or Driver's survival mode - are entirely narrative-free. The player makes their own 'stories' rather than being funnelled down prescribed narrative paths. Look at the inexorable rise of multiplayer - doesn't that indicate that the vast majority of players care very little for conventional narrative in games?

Wholeheartedly agree about MGS - it is, and always has been, a load of complete and utter gibberish. Some great bits of design buried under megatons of rank bullshit. I don't understand how Kojima gets away with it. 90 minute long cutscenes indeed.

[Professor Bear]

There have been attempts to create more involving stories in games going back to text adventures in the 1980s, it's just the technology wasn't there to accommodate the ambition - but now we have consoles with so much processing power that at one point the PS3 had an app that let it hook up to other PS3s to do Alzheimers research, it'd be daft to not take advantage of it to create more involving narratives.  Pong was fine in 1980, but no-one is going to pay forty quid for that today.
I also think it's probably misleading to suggest that games are automatically trying to be tv or movies - these are merely our points of reference for discussing them.  Games have a longer play time than the average tv series or movie so the three/five act structures rarely apply, and if anything their best analogue is with the Hero's Journey, but they are really their own thing and TLoU is a very good example of why.

i must admit I am a fan of Hicks, not sure why, I know what you mean about the waving arms etc. Thanks for the heads up, might be more inclined to check it out as i don't think I'll get to play the game

I more admire that Hicks gets an idea in her head and then just sits down and hammers out a book - I think I bought Zombies Calling just to see if it was a real comic and not some elaborate internet messageboard in-joke, but it's a real book, and unlike many similar exercises in genre strip-mining from lesser writers it doesn't seem ashamed of - or determined to deny - its creative influences, so fair play.

I dare say in a year or two you can play Last of Us when you pick up a PS3 on the cheap, and the game is being re-released on PS4 so there'll be a few copies of the PS3 version knocking around.  As fun as the "my particular household appliance is better than yours" game is when you are 12, I don't really understood why Sony or Microsoft are still - through subsidiary companies like Naughty Dog - doing games exclusively for "their" consoles in this day and age, especially big games like Uncharted or Halo that do movie-beating numbers.  It's my understanding that hardware sales make huge losses for both companies but software is hugely profitable, so why they'd cut themselves off from potentially doubling sales is beyond me.  I think it must be a man thing.

[Ghastly McNasty]

I'm all for great stories in games. Being drawn in to a game and being allowed to make important decisions that alter narrative gives gaming an immersive edge over movies. Films are great n all but they don't offer the same level of interactivity you get in a game.

Crackers such as Bioshock and Dead Space allow you to explore the world's they put you in. You can delve in much deeper than the surface story, reading posters on wall, exploring sub-quests that reveal more back story. There's certainly none of that in a set-time movie where you're being shown just the director's vision.

We shouldn't really hold up one example (MGS) and claim that cut scenes are shit in general. Play Mass Effect 2. They pretty much damn near nailed the cut-scene/action combo for a near fluid movie like gaming experience. 

Ignoring the storyline in some games is not playing the game to its full potential.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

There are greater evils than cutscenes, like quick-time events, which are basically unskippable cutscenes which continually repeat themselves if you don't push a button at the right moment.

[sheldipez]

I dont mind quick time events, gives you something do during cut scenes instead of reaching for the skip button. I don't mind story or cut scenes in games as long as it's well written like TellTales the Walking Dead and not like Metal Gear Solid.

I wasn't a fan of Uncharted 3 at all which Naughty Dog got near critical acclaim for, I thought it was a very pretty game hiding a boring plot, unsatisfying shooting and way too restrictive level design so don't think I'll check out Last of Us especially considering I just don't have the patience for stealth em ups.

[radiator]

I'm all for great stories in games. Being drawn in to a game and being allowed to make important decisions that alter narrative gives gaming an immersive edge over movies.

I don't think I have ever played a game where I was able to convincingly, satisfyingly alter the outcome of the story, other than in a few contrived, binary 'good' or evil' or 'good/bad' ending scenarios.

Crackers such as Bioshock and Dead Space allow you to explore the world's they put you in. You can delve in much deeper than the surface story, reading posters on wall, exploring sub-quests that reveal more back story. There's certainly none of that in a set-time movie where you're being shown just the director's vision.

And I would argue that, in terms of visual storytelling, the vast majority of games are light-years behind what the average film is capable of. In terms of lighting, of art direction, of drawing influence from things other than other games or films, of overall considered visual storytelling, the only impressive, sophisticated example that springs to mind is the aforementioned Half Life 2. If you as a developer are expecting players to read screeds of text off background materials to fill in your story, imo you've failed as a storyteller.

Pong was fine in 1980, but no-one is going to pay forty quid for that today.

So every game that doesn't attempt to be to tell a 'cinematic' story is old-fashioned or antiquated? Sorry, but that's utter bollocks. Complex, 'cinematic', narrative-heavy games tend to date horribly whereas classic 'true' game games that concentrate on mechanics and gameplay are often timeless.

I'm not against any kind of narrative per se. I would even go so far as to say the strengths of games as a medium are their ability to convey atmosphere and a sense of location (I would cite Limbo as an example of brilliant, unobtrusive, visuals and interactivity-led videogame storytelling). I am just almost entirely against games that force feed you a linear narrative that gets in the way of the game itself, or try to get you to give a shit about a lunkhead Gears of War character dies in a cut scene. I still find it embarrassing and/or unintentionally funny 99% of the time when a game tries to provoke an emotional response from me.

[JamesC]

I'm all for great stories in games. Being drawn in to a game and being allowed to make important decisions that alter narrative gives gaming an immersive edge over movies.

I don't think I have ever played a game where I was able to convincingly, satisfyingly alter the outcome of the story, other than in a few contrived, binary 'good' or evil' or 'good/bad' ending scenarios.

While I'd broadly agree with this (along with a lot of the other points you've made) I think that with something like Mass Effect, despite the fact that the ending basically boils down to one of a few 'Choose Your Own Adventure' style conclusions, the story is really about the journey rather than the destination.
It's more about who's lived and died along the way, what has happened to the various species and civilisations and how 'your' Sheppard is regarded within the game world.
As well as being a very fun shooter/RPG Mass Effect has the advantage of letting you make decisions that you'd be shouting at the screen over (Nooo - don't let the Krogans die from the Genophage) had this been made as a film or TV show.