The Last Of Us

[radiator]

Fair point, and Mass Effect (and Bioware's output in general) is one of a handful of games that I'd highlight as having a pretty good narrative... having said that, it's also derivative in the extreme. Said it before, but it's basically 45% Star Wars, 45% Star Trek and 10% Halo. There's nothing original or particularly interesting about it as a universe. Speaking of Halo - ISTR the first one was a kind of pastiche/parody of military sci fi tropes, and didn't take itself very seriously - hence the Grunts etc, and the fact that Apone from Aliens is in it. Then it disappeared up it's own arse after it was a huge success and the developers seemed to think they'd created a work of literature.

I still maintain that the very best videogame 'stories' - the ones that you still talk about with your friends years later - are random things that arise naturally through gameplay ('emergent gameplay' if you want to be wanky about it) - crazy flukes, near-misses, that sort of thing. I can still remember playing Vice City with my friends, trying to outrun a SWAT armoured car on a Vespa, swerving wildly left and right whilst looking back to avoid it, while everyone fell about laughing. And you can't script or control stuff like that.

[JamesC]

Oh, I agree Mass Effect is very much an amalgamation of ideas nicked from other franchises. The game I really can't wait for - mainly because of the world it's set in - is Cyberpunk 2077.

If the story's even half decent and the world is faithful to the original RPG it will be amazing.

[Ghastly McNasty]

I guess it boils down to what type of games you enjoy playing the most.  For me, when playing alone, I like to be taken on a journey like with a book but more interactive, so I firmly believe that a solid storyline is an integral part of certain gaming genres. I happy for them to include cut scenes or to try and emotionally engage me.

These games are a different kettle to 'group' games or online gaming which offer the unpredictability of human involvement. The first 2 Modern Warefare's generated some great conversation at work after a good session online the night before.

[radiator]

These games are a different kettle to 'group' games or online gaming which offer the unpredictability of human involvement. The first 2 Modern Warefare's generated some great conversation at work after a good session online the night before.

I don't particularly play much in the way of multiplayer games, that's not really what I'm getting at - I'm talking more about the manner, or language, in which games tell stories.

[radiator]

I guess it all comes down to taste, and what you want from a game. Personally I think it's utterly bizarre that there are people who will blaze through a game on the easiest setting just to enjoy the 'cinematic' story and get a feeling of empowerment, and - though I understand the reasons why - bemoan somewhat that singleplayer games have become so afraid to challenge the player - to the point where they're almost completely linear, passive experiences, shuffling the player from one clearly delineated set of fireworks to the next. I'd rather read a book or watch a film if it's a story I'm after. I play games for the mental and dexterity challenge, for the exploration and discovery aspect, for the kinetic thrill.

Perhaps I'm being unfair on them, but that's why I feel The Last of Us/Uncharted wouldn't be my cup of tea - they seem to represent everything I dislike about modern games.

[Professor Bear]

I liked that bit in South Park where Stan's dad drags his guitar into the living room because he sees the kids playing Guitar Hero, then starts getting angry because they're "not really playing guitar, they're just hitting buttons and having fun."

[JamesC]

I've just played about the first 2.5 hours of this game and I have to say that so far I'm a bit disappointed.
Here are my thoughts so far (possible spoilers):

[spoiler]I went in not knowing a great deal about the story other than it was a post apocalyptic thing - I'd heard comparisons to 'The Road'. I was pretty underwhelmed to find out that it's basically zombies. I'm bored to bloody death of zombies. I'd have preferred the enemies to be other survivors trying to scratch a living to be honest. That's more what I was expecting really - the game asks 'What would you do to survive?' Well if a mushroom headed zombie came after me I'd hit it on the head with a plank of wood - which I've already done about 20 times!
I was also expecting some really innovative game mechanics. Haven't seen any so far but maybe it will get better as it goes along. From what I can see it's basically Uncharted mixed with Deus Ex: Human Revolution set in zombie land.
It's a little clunky in places too. Sneaking around, I've found that the NPCs bump into you and generally get in the way. I've seen an NPC get stuck on the side of a staircase too.
After having played a couple of Uncharted games I'd like to tell Naughty Dog that boosting a character to a higher level so that they can kick down a ladder or pull you up does not constitute 'playing'.
I can't say I find the setting particularly convincing either. It's 20 years into this zombie outbreak but it seems that there are plenty of weapons lying around and a stable military structure. The infection is fungal and spread by spores so I can't see why soldiers in breathing apparatus are having so many problems taking down unarmed infected people - especially as half of them are blind! I guess I can't be too critical as I don't know the whole story yet.
I'm waiting for something to happen to Tess as all of the marketing concentrates exclusively on Joel and Ellie. 
All in all it's a bit 'meh' and I'm currently of the opinion that the best of these third person adventure/shooter games has been Tomb Raider.
As I say though, I'm only a couple of hours in and I genuinely hope that it's going to pick up and blow me away!
[/spoiler]

[Professor Bear]

Well, if you don't mind spoilers, read on, but the short and spoiler-free version is "it's going to be fifteen hours or so of game at the very least, and all those points are covered or subverted sooner or later."

But if you don't mind spoilers: [spoiler]People of various factions are the main antagonists the further you go into the game, the mushroom zombies are just part of the setting and plot McGuffin - though the latter becomes less important over time and eventually you are simply "on a journey with another character".  Until you get to the Massachusetts courthouse, the levels you're playing are essentially a long tutorial and world-building.
This is more opinion, I suppose, but the fact the controls aren't total dogshit is possibly the greatest innovation in survival horror in the last decade.  Resident Evil and Silent Hill are pretty unplayable unless you have grown up playing Resident Evil and Silent Hill games, but TLOU has industry-standard controls (ported from Uncharted, admittedly), making it - if anything - far too easy.
Sneak mechanics - and successful use thereof - are dependent on the difficulty level, and on very easy, your NPCs blunder around and even walk in front of enemies and you won't be discovered.  The harder levels are a shock, though - especially if you've got used to that spidey-sense listening thing.
Like yourself, I thought there was too much boosting and ladder-fetching in this (and other recent Naughty Dog games), but it does change as the game goes on to accommodate other types of puzzle, especially when you have to get characters who can't swim across a river or a flooded street, or when you try boosting and it suckers you by springing an action sequence.
Don't know about "lots of weapons laying around", as even on the easiest difficulty you don't get ammo from all fallen enemies, even if they had a gun, while the opening levels are based around retrieving weapons because they're so valuable - again, ramp up the difficulty and there's a lot less ammo and weapons around.  The military also isn't as stable as it looks, which becomes apparent later when you start seeing the cities they've lost.  As for why the mushroom people have been a threat, that applies equally to regular old zombies and why they could ever be a threat, but part of the infection cycle involves spores spread on the wind, usually by infected who stumble into the buffer zone around the military-controlled areas, and then people hide their infections from others - this is a plot point several times in the game - because there's still hope that a cure exists, a rumor spread by the Fireflies and which your characters have bought into.
Although Joel and Ellie are the central protagonists, you play with different NPC companions throughout the game - at least four off the top of my head - and there are others who tag along with you and your companion at various stages.[/spoiler]

[Pete Wells]

I'm finally playing this and, while adoring the graphics (my missus actually asked me what I was 'watching' when she came in during a cutscene and got a surprise when she realised it was a game) and loving the characters, the gameplay is leaving me very, very cold.

I'm normally a good gamer, but have found myself running around in circles on this one several times. I'm currently with Bill sneaking through a load of gardens filled with mushroom faces and I'm sick of getting instantly killed and having to go back to the start of the section.

That's the crux of it for me, at times, the game stops being fun and engaging and just becomes a tedious slog.

[Rog69]

I'm in exactly the same place as you and feel the same way about the game too.

While very well produced, the game play is nothing special, it's like a even more linear, cut down version of the Arkham games mixed with some rudimentary RPG style crafting.

[Professor Bear]

Never fight when you can run, as your character isn't Batman, he is 49 years old when the game starts and we are constantly assaulted with reminders what a pushover he is despite his gruff voice and scowling ways.
I was on a half-hearted trophy mop-up of the Uncharted games and recently decided to get back to Uncharted 3, which I did almost immediately after getting put off by the difficulty of the later Winter chapter of Last Of Us*, and despite playing both on the second-hardest difficulty I was surprised at what a breeze Uncharted 3 was in comparison.  I recall having the odd death on even the easiest difficulty, but this time I was just waltzing through it on Very Hard.  I have thus concluded that The Last of Us is a hard game.


* [spoiler]Where you take over as Ellie and ammo is nonexistent, it takes longer to reload than it takes infected to crawl through the window and run at you, and everything kills you the instant it makes contact with your character.[/spoiler]

[Keef Monkey]

I was the same, when I played it I found it frequently frustrating. The way the characters are written and performed is incredible, it possibly has the best mocap I've seen in a game, but I couldn't really find anything else in it that was up to that level of polish. I almost hate to give my opinion of it because I know people love it and I've been torn to shreds for suggesting it's not perfect (apparently I'm just playing it wrong) so please bear in mind all of this is just my opinion.

It does a very bad job of tipping you off to what's expected of you in any given area. It purports to be a stealth game for the most part, but there are areas where I would spend a great deal of time sneaking around the enemies to avoid them, before finding out that the game won't then progress because the next scripted event doesn't trigger until you kill everyone. There were also set-pieces where sneaking wasn't an option at all and you were expected to hold off enemies, and these parts seemed really terribly balanced for the game's combat controls. Also, I'm not totally against enemies with one-hit kill attacks, it makes a lot of sense in a sneaky game, but if 3 of them spawn in the same spot at once and run at me simultaneously, making it impossible to kill one without another getting me, then that's just poor design. There was one point where a poor choice of dialogue and an objective that contradicted previously learned behaviours led me to believe the scripting had broken, and googling that particular 'bug' brought up a ton of forum posts about the same thing. It wasn't broken, it was just presented very badly.

I'm glad I played it, because the story is brilliantly told and still lingers with me (and the opening to the game is one of the best prologues I've seen in gaming), but I spent more time sighing and shaking my head at it than I did immersed in it. It was a 3/5 game for me, and far from the medium-defining experience many found it to be.

[JamesC]

I gave up on it.
I honestly thought it was terrible. It utterly bored me and after getting about halfway through and realising that none of the time spent with it had been fun I sold it on ebay.

[Professor Bear]

It is a stone cold fact that you can't please everyone, as I feel the same way about Gears of War, FIFA and the latter WWE games.  Also those racing games where you just slalom the car constantly trying to point it in the right direction, which wind me up something rotten to the point I wish the game had a face SO I COULD PUNCH IT IN THE BALLS.

I do like that there's a guy on Amazon who gave TLoU 1 star and insists that it is the worst game ever because it won't start.  He's checked forums and other people have had the same problem so "it's not the disc", and if I'm the only one who thinks it's awesome that there's a guy somewhere fuming because the rest of the gaming world has played some sort of long con on him to steal his 30 pounds, then so be it.

[Pete Wells]

I completed this yesterday and it grew on me a whole lot by the end. It was, perhaps, the most beautiful game I've ever played and the character models were stunning. The story and acting were great but unfortunately the gameplay was, at best, good (and often f**king annoying.)

I'm pleased I played it, but give me Uncharted any day.