• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

News In the US, The Last of Us Part II has outsold Miles Morales and Ghost of Tsushima

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
:pie_eyeroll: You realize that a discounted price encourages sales right, that's why they do it.
Its revenue, so if TLOU 2 is $30 and GoT is $60, that means TLOU 2 would have to sell 2 copies to match it and 3 copies to exceed one copy sold of GoT. By this factor alone, the price drop didn't play a huge factor as you may think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX
Jan 29, 2019
6,565
7,224
520
So, TLOU 2 sold more in 12 months than Ghost in 11 and Miles in 7.

Blow Your Mind Wow GIF by Product Hunt


What a success. That is probably why just a few weeks ago you were getting TLOU 2 plus TLOU 1 plus Spiderman plus Horizon Zero Dawn for 50 bucks here. So much success.

And just as another clue.

And all 3 are in the top 4 selling games for the year they were released in.
 
Jun 1, 2021
544
776
350
Good sales for all three of the mentioned games, had a lot of fun with all of them. Well, not quite sure whether fun is a thing in either of the Last of Us games but you know what I mean.
It's always good to see exclusive games still being able to make a list like this, five of these ten games are exclusive:
Animal Crossing: New Horizons (Nintendo)
Ghost of Tsushima (Sony)
The Last of US: Part II (Sony)
Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales (Sony)
Super Mario 3D All-Stars (Nintendo)

I imagine that they'd both be pretty happy that their own games can beat all but the biggest multi platform titles that always do well. A bit surprised to see Assassin's Creed doing so well though although I suppose a cross generation multi platform title that's launched with the new consoles is probably ticking a lot of boxes for people.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

Woggleman

Member
Jan 1, 2020
2,128
3,301
445
I know the creator himself said he doesn't use the world fun but the combat in this game is some of the best fun I have had in a game in quite some time. In my current playthrough I have become a big fan of the explosive
 

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
6,795
4,912
1,730
I really dont' get the level of vitriol LOUII generates on this board. Like is it a joke that i'm not getting?

It's some weird thing about "ownership" of characters. People seem to think they own certain characters these days. Joel and Luke Skywalker are 2 examples. And 2 examples of hatred because "they treated a fictional character I love like shit". Even though there is no possible way to treat a fictional character like shit, they don't really exist.
 

BadBurger

Gold Member
Nov 6, 2019
3,851
6,139
590
Get vaccinated
I think it's funny how things never really change for long in the sales chart game. Still a CoD, Madden, and Assassin's Creed dominating, even when everyone is discussing what Sony game sold more than another as Sony laughs all the way to the bank either way.
 

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
2,555
8,586
455
:pie_eyeroll: You realize that a discounted price encourages sales right, that's why they do it.
And you realize that discount price also decreases the total revenue, right?

It's a very simple point: discount prices and sales do not matter at all if you are measuring it by dollar sales/revenue, instead of number of units sold. If you are generating more revenue by discounting your product than you would have earned otherwise, it only means you're doing it right.

In other words, you could also say that "TLOU 2 earned more revenue than Ghost of Tsushima and Miles Morales despite being sold at a lower average price."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Magnific0giganticus
Jan 29, 2019
6,565
7,224
520
I know the creator himself said he doesn't use the world fun but the combat in this game is some of the best fun I have had in a game in quite some time. In my current playthrough I have become a big fan of the explosive
I started using traps (don't think I used one in my first playthrough)... The dogs are so easy to entice to them, and I can't be stealth around them anyway.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

thismeinteil

Member
Jan 6, 2020
420
1,120
340
Must not be doing too well outside of the US. We have gotten three sales updates for GOT to TLOU2's one. My guess is it's not coming anywhere close to the OG. Give MM a few more months and I'm sure it will be above it in the US, too. Even though it's the most hyped up sequels to one of the most successful PS games ever vs "overpriced DLC."
 
Last edited:

e&e

Banned
Nov 17, 2020
1,154
1,040
485
Sony fanboys teasing another Sony fanboys.

That's a new thing.
It’s so goddamn weird and the only first party fan base I’ve seen do that…
Personally, this disgusts me, but it is what it is.

As to why it performed how it did, others have touched on it. IMO, it owes a great deal of it's success based on how fantastic the first one was and how many of those people were expecting something similar for the sequel. Whether they actually LIKED what they ended up with vs sales of the product are two different things that all of you gloaters need to remember. GAF represents a small vocal group of the overall gaming community, so if alot of you here liked what you played and we can be certain the shithole ERA all liked it, while that speaks alot, it isn't by any means a representation to say for sure that everyone enjoyed it who played it. A similar count of those who ACTUALLY ENJOYED what they played vs total sales would be a much more interesting story to hear.
Holy shit, this post can’t be serious…
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
5,963
5,393
625
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
Must not be doing too well outside of the US. We have gotten three sales updates for GOT to TLOU2's one. My guess is it's not coming anywhere close to the OG. Give MM a few more months and I'm sure it will be above it in the US, too. Even though it's the most hyped up sequels to one of the most successful PS games ever vs "overpriced DLC."

Yea I see no evidence of that, like none. The fact that it was even Sony's best selling game last year basically means any update you have on Ghost or Spiderman, its higher for The Last Of Us 2, but to be higher for the Last Of Us 2 means by default it is selling faster then the first game. It took the first game almost 7 years to move 20 million units.... we know Ghost sold under The Last Of Us 2....we know Ghost sold around 7 million units, this means The Last Of Us 2 even if at 8 million units, was able to do almost half the fucking numbers of The Last Of Us 1 in LESS then 1 year.

Before a remaster....before The Last Of Us 2 factions release, before The Last Of Us 3 announcement and release and before The Last Of Us 1 remake. That is a lot of time to keep selling man and I don't see shit that argues it will now magically sell less, as if the first game just moved 20 million in a day or some shit, it took time, this would take time too and its again moving faster. Its a guess with little behind it.

For all we know, Sony is waiting till the announcement of Factions to give those numbers or waiting till the reveal of The Last Of Us 1 to reveal those numbers.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: thismeinteil

Zeroing

Member
Sep 19, 2019
1,327
1,814
365
Sony fanboys teasing another Sony fanboys.

That's a new thing.
Yeah it’s weird. You know Sony makes lots of games when their fans start arguing to each other about which is the best game. That also makes me believe that fans of PlayStation are critical (good thing)

that also happens with Nintendo fans but not so often.

meanwhile at Xbox… no critical judgment at all.

It’s interesting. I’ll need more data for my new book - gamers on forums, opinions, memes and total madness’

joking 🙃
 
  • LOL
Reactions: EDMIX

e&e

Banned
Nov 17, 2020
1,154
1,040
485
Yeah it’s weird. You know Sony makes lots of games when their fans start arguing to each other about which is the best game. That also makes me believe that fans of PlayStation are critical (good thing)

that also happens with Nintendo fans but not so often.

meanwhile at Xbox… no critical judgment at all.

It’s interesting. I’ll need more data for my new book - gamers on forums, opinions, memes and total madness’

joking 🙃
Nope, it paints Sony fans negatively and the types of games Sony is making might be too similar which brings up all these comparisons of which of Sony’s 3rd person cinematic action games are the best. Happy to see Sony realizes this and starting to branch out a little.

The games are good, just enjoy and move on without this mindless bickering between the fans!
 
Last edited:

Zeroing

Member
Sep 19, 2019
1,327
1,814
365
Nope, it paints Sony fans negatively and the types of games Sony is making might be too similar which brings up all these comparisons of which of Sony’s 3rd person cinematic action games are the best. Happy to see Sony realizes this and starting to branch out a little.

The games are good, just enjoy and move on without this mindless bickering between the fans!
i don’t see it negatively I see it as a medium that as grown up! It’s not about gameplay anymore it’s more than that, it’s the story, how it plays, personal tastes

The impact that a game makes on you is more nuanced than 30 years ago.

yeah one can argue about the old 3rd person thing. But looking at the broad spectrum only Sony seem to be doing it, everyone else is either still releasing sequel upon sequel of old IPs or multiplayer games who are made around dlc and micro transitions

I still remember EA and a ton of gaming websites declaring single player games dead.

but yeah this bickering leads to nothing.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
1,964
5,798
955
It's some weird thing about "ownership" of characters. People seem to think they own certain characters these days. Joel and Luke Skywalker are 2 examples. And 2 examples of hatred because "they treated a fictional character I love like shit". Even though there is no possible way to treat a fictional character like shit, they don't really exist.
Come on man, that's just straight up disingenuous.

I'll explain this simply, though I am far from the first to do so.

People do grow to love characters they watch, play as etc.

This is entirely normal. Entertainment is designed to get the audience to connect with the characters (usually).

Characters are built on several things including personalities, the conflicts they endure, the way they overcome etc. It's called character development. Luke Skywalker goes on the archetypal heroes journey etc.

The Star Wars sequels destroyed Luke Skywalker's character and the journey he went on.

TLoU2 made Joel out to be a fool in direct contrast to part 1.

Both of these out of left field changes in their characters occurred because the writers that were in charge at the time had personal political views they wanted to inject into these stories. Totally nonsensical views for many that had nothing to do with the established characters. That point about being established is critically important. I don't care about The Last of Us really, but I did enjoy the first one. I grew up loving Star Wars. Couldn't care less now. They completely ruined what the first trilogy was about, what it's characters went through, what they earned and on and on and on. And that's it, I've let it go, and life goes on. But don't say it didn't happen or that it's the audience's fault. That's absurd. That's like saying if Rian Johnson had Luke put on heels and decide he wanted to be a burlesque dancer from a galaxy far, far away, that an upset audience was just having a "weird thing about ownership." Get the heck out of here with that bull.

Yes people who grew to like or love these characters can be disappointed, angry, upset, whatever they want. It's their right to feel that way. It has nothing to do with "ownership" and probably more to do with massive disappointment with what they saw happen with characters they loved.

Life is dark enough. People don't need BS examples made of their heroes at the alter of the political flavor of the day.
 
  • Like
  • LOL
Reactions: Warablo and EDMIX

Neff

Member
Feb 6, 2012
13,146
2,220
1,080
UK
Both of these out of left field changes in their characters occurred because the writers that were in charge at the time had personal political views they wanted to inject into these stories

Vastly different situations. Star Wars lost its sole creator who had zero input in the sequels.

TLoU2 retained its prequel's writer and most of its creative team. Druckmann's writing style, characterisations and themes are consistent across both games.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

EDMIX

Member
Apr 5, 2018
5,963
5,393
625
33
South Florida aka Outer Haven
People do grow to love characters they watch, play as etc.

Thats nice and all, but this is just a fictional video game, its not that serious...

TLoU2 made Joel out to be a fool in direct contrast to part 1.

I disagree. He makes mistakes in part 1, he makes mistakes in part 2. Bill even warns Joel that his actions will get him killed on day, he himself states you can't out run your past...the game ends with you killing a doctor in a scene you can't skip and killing Marlene. I think many of us already knew he would die based on those actions, for years I though Marlene's family would come to kill him lol

So buddy, the fucking man makes mistakes, he is human, he literally makes several in the first game, do you not understand that the fucking person that made the story, might have already written is death BEFORE any of us ever heard of The Last Of Us?

I myself have written things where the ending is already planned, so I doubt that he wrote him to live and then was like "no bro, lets kill him now", too many things occur in the first game that show you he is flawed, makes mistakes and his death will come from something like that.

Fuck, you could argue he is "fool" for trusting the 2 bothers in the very first game or even trusting BILL in the very first game. It is in his nature to do this to really be making it sound like in part 2 its this brand new shit.

the writers that were in charge at the time had personal political views

Incorrect bud. The person that literally wrote the series is the same person you are talking about that wrote part 1 and 2 and any of the things you are talking about exist in part 1.

more to do with massive disappointment with what they saw happen with characters they loved.

Ummmm suuuuuuuure. Don't watch films rated R and don't play games rated M, those are for adults bud, many games exist with happy go lucky family friendly furry things rated PG, G, E etc.

Sounds like zero adult situations are allowed, thus maybe don't play or watch content created for adults. Things like this happen in real life.... anyone getting triggered by this doesn't need to play such things then if they get so upset over it.

Edit. Once again, this is why the medium for some is too young for shit like this. Gamers can't handle something like American History X if it was a game, if they are crying over this.

Play something else and stop trying to force developers to make static, comic, happy go lucky junk. Go play Call Of Duty or comic book game etc if you want that. Its clear from the beginning The Last Us was NEVER a series about folks NEVER DYING and everyone living and no one getting hurt etc.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
Yes people who grew to like or love these characters can be disappointed, angry, upset, whatever they want. It's their right to feel that way. It has nothing to do with "ownership" and probably more to do with massive disappointment with what they saw happen with characters they loved.
I saw this tweeted last week and he pretty much sums it up.


Everyone may not feel the same way he does about the game, but The Last of Us Part II that there are many emotionally weak gamers in this world.

I also don't buy it for a second that many people's hatred isn't just related to Joel's death. Only a few cutscenes were leaked and no one knew anything about the story other than Joel's death and that you have to play as Abby half way through the game. People were already calling it a terrible story. People decided to nitpick every single detail about the story and call it bad writing. It's laughable.
 
  • Like
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: sol_bad and EDMIX

Yselacrey00

Junior Member
Nov 20, 2018
1,294
1,594
520
Good sales for all three of the mentioned games, had a lot of fun with all of them. Well, not quite sure whether fun is a thing in either of the Last of Us games but you know what I mean.
It's always good to see exclusive games still being able to make a list like this, five of these ten games are exclusive:
Animal Crossing: New Horizons (Nintendo)
Ghost of Tsushima (Sony)
The Last of US: Part II (Sony)
Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales (Sony)
Super Mario 3D All-Stars (Nintendo)

I imagine that they'd both be pretty happy that their own games can beat all but the biggest multi platform titles that always do well. A bit surprised to see Assassin's Creed doing so well though although I suppose a cross generation multi platform title that's launched with the new consoles is probably ticking a lot of boxes for people.
Yeah, that's what I realized after playing Final Fantasy VII Remake. I haven't played a fun game, a genuinely fun game in a really long time. All these games by Sony forgot about the fun... Sure, they are nice to play and have great stories but they are not fun. You wouldn't play those games twice because you weren't having fun, you were just anxious, sometimes scared, sometimes sad, but you were never having fun, you just wanted to see the story. That's the thing with games these days, gameplay is just serviceable, it let's you go through the story, but it's not fun.
 

bender

Bending Rodríguez (22, 1,729)
Apr 12, 2010
11,472
19,745
1,430
I saw this tweeted last week and he pretty much sums it up.


Everyone may not feel the same way he does about the game, but The Last of Us Part II that there are many emotionally weak gamers in this world.

I also don't buy it for a second that many people's hatred isn't just related to Joel's death. Only a few cutscenes were leaked and no one knew anything about the story other than Joel's death and that you have to play as Abby half way through the game. People were already calling it a terrible story. People decided to nitpick every single detail about the story and call it bad writing. It's laughable.

The only thing that stood out about The Last of Us, apart from the visuals, was the relationship between Joel and Ellie. Kudos to those casting choices and performances. Otherwise you had cover based shooter, albeit more brutal than most, that was an evolution of Uncharted, which was aped from Gears, and archaic puzzle designs (boxes, floating crates, ladders). The story wasn't all that original either. Mechanically it felt dated at launch. It is helped at higher difficulty levels were resources are scarce (making you pick and choose what is best to craft) and the removal of Batman-vision.

I don't even mind the sequel killing Joel. It fits in the world that Naughty Dog created. The problem is that no other relationship presented in the game compares to Joel and Ellie. Hell, Ellie's character changed into something wholly unlikeable, which again is okay as she's an adult now with her own set of experiences (and it's not like she is the only character to regress; see Tommy). I think they also did a really poor job of establishing Ellie and giving players a reason to empathize with her. Having her kill Joel out of the gate turns that task up a notch or ten and the writing and performances just aren't there. They tried to create something with Abby and Lev, but it just felt transparent and ham-fisted. All of the writing and performances just couldn't capture the magic of Joel and Ellie and nothing highlights that better than the Museum flashback in TLOU2. Those two voice actors were just made to play off of one another.

Mechanically, TLOU2 doesn't do a lot to modernize what already felt like a dated mechanics. It's more brutal sure and you have more tools in your arsenal to go with crawling, but it is still the same small arena based cover shooter with yet again archaic puzzles. The game also does a disservice by bringing in the Uncharted style bombast to a series that was largely grounded before.

It's not a bad game. It just isn't as good as the first game, which wasn't a great game either. It just had some great characters to carry an otherwise also ran story and game play mechanics.

I do think the backlash from the anti-SJW types is a little ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Warablo

rofif

Member
Sep 13, 2019
6,931
9,635
620
Feels like GOT just passed by unnoticed. Even I skipped it... I just don;t like these boring open world games
 

Umbral

Member
May 7, 2020
1,641
2,954
425
RDR 2 can thank RDR1
GTAV can thank the previous installments in the series.
SF4 can thank SF2 and 3.

The list goes on.
Those game also happened to also be good games themselves ( I didn’t care for GTA V, but most people did.). They weren’t just hitching a ride on the their predecessors’ coattails.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
Those game also happened to also be good games themselves ( I didn’t care for GTA V, but most people did.). They weren’t just hitching a ride on the their predecessors’ coattails.
They all gained popularity from their predecessors. You're lying to yourself if you believe otherwise. I don't know why you guys believe most people didn't like it and it's only selling well because of TLOU 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EDMIX

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
6,795
4,912
1,730
Come on man, that's just straight up disingenuous.

I'll explain this simply, though I am far from the first to do so.

People do grow to love characters they watch, play as etc.

This is entirely normal. Entertainment is designed to get the audience to connect with the characters (usually).

Characters are built on several things including personalities, the conflicts they endure, the way they overcome etc. It's called character development. Luke Skywalker goes on the archetypal heroes journey etc.

The Star Wars sequels destroyed Luke Skywalker's character and the journey he went on.

TLoU2 made Joel out to be a fool in direct contrast to part 1.

Both of these out of left field changes in their characters occurred because the writers that were in charge at the time had personal political views they wanted to inject into these stories. Totally nonsensical views for many that had nothing to do with the established characters. That point about being established is critically important. I don't care about The Last of Us really, but I did enjoy the first one. I grew up loving Star Wars. Couldn't care less now. They completely ruined what the first trilogy was about, what it's characters went through, what they earned and on and on and on. And that's it, I've let it go, and life goes on. But don't say it didn't happen or that it's the audience's fault. That's absurd. That's like saying if Rian Johnson had Luke put on heels and decide he wanted to be a burlesque dancer from a galaxy far, far away, that an upset audience was just having a "weird thing about ownership." Get the heck out of here with that bull.

Yes people who grew to like or love these characters can be disappointed, angry, upset, whatever they want. It's their right to feel that way. It has nothing to do with "ownership" and probably more to do with massive disappointment with what they saw happen with characters they loved.

Life is dark enough. People don't need BS examples made of their heroes at the alter of the political flavor of the day.

Sorry Dr Bass, I disagree with what you are saying. I can understand people disagreeing with taking a character in a certain direction and not liking it but the reaction to these two characters is beyond childish.

When it comes to Luke I love to compare him to Obi-Wan, reason being is because Obi-Wan had a massive shift in character that happened off screen. It's really weird how people can accept that but not accept Luke's change of character off screen. I don't think the sequel trilogy really needed to explain that shift in character either because it's not his story, they did though and I can accept the explanation. It's easy to imagine doubting ones self if failing to raise your nephew the wrong way when you thought you had been doing the right thing for the last 18 years or so. I'd hate it if Luke ended up kicking the Emperor's arse in episode 9 because it wasn't his story.
Prequels = Anakin
Originals = Luke
Sequels = Rey

With Joel, it's been 5 years since we saw him. He has been living in a loving and caring community, no longer in survival mode, no longer dealing in guns and torturing/killing people. He has a "daughter" to look after. His new life softened his heart and his brothers. I can accept the changes in his character.

The passage of time changes people.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

EruditeHobo

Member
Jun 5, 2013
647
525
655
San Francisco, CA
Glad it sold well. It's a great game and one of the best examples of using the medium specifically for telling a very particular story. And despite the fact that it's clearly not for everyone. I remain really happy that this huge risk & massive investment in a challenging, rich, epic drama, was well rewarded.

So many others would rather play GaaS, the next COD or some new battle royale where you can earn outfits and dress up like Dom Toretto during a promotion or whatever... I'd much rather see more of these. This success means this style of game is still viable in the marketplace, and we will see more of them. At least for a little while longer. That's a win for people like me. 🍾 🙌
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

EruditeHobo

Member
Jun 5, 2013
647
525
655
San Francisco, CA
Life is dark enough. People don't need BS examples made of their heroes at the alter of the political flavor of the day.

Think this says more about you than creators/storytellers.

Your perception that Luke was ruined or that Joel was made stupid are nonsense on their face... but honestly even if they weren't silly, they are still just yours. The characters don't belong to you.

Sometimes some stories can be a little contrived but there's not huge disservice to previously established character canon to tell these stories... they are in service of something very, very obvious, both your examples.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

Duchess

Member
Oct 2, 2020
774
1,541
405
Feels like GOT just passed by unnoticed. Even I skipped it... I just don;t like these boring open world games
Honestly, the game is a masterpiece. The combat is extremely satisfying. Play it on PS5, so you get a smooth 60fps experience.

The story is also pretty damn great. You think it's about the Mongol invasion of island of Tsushima, but that's really just the backdrop to a much more personal journey.
 

tassletine

Member
Oct 24, 2007
1,529
620
1,235
I did. Seems ND are quite efficient compared to their peers.


I did. Seems ND are quite efficient compared to their peers.

Although I don't think posting data from over a decade ago is helpful, trying to find any info on ND has proven pretty futile.
I do remember several articles at the time of U4 release saying that it was about 100 million, but I can't find them anywhere so take that with a pinch of salt. It seems that ND keep their cards pretty close.

Having said that, Dev budget wouldn't affect advertising budget. So if you scale up 20 million to today's money and factor in double/triple team size I think you can see that they could have made a loss.

I would like to reiterate though, that my original reply to the OP was to point out that the success story in the charts was not LOU2 but GOT due to how much profit would have been made.
It was also a lament as to how stagnant the charts are.

It's like writing a post about how Mike Tyson beat a middleweight contender. You would expect that. It's not surprising a sequel to a beloved series, with a huge budget behind it, does well.
What is surprising is how well GOT did comparatively and how badly LOU2 did even with all that muscle behind it.
 

mxbison

Member
Dec 9, 2020
682
885
285
I know the creator himself said he doesn't use the world fun but the combat in this game is some of the best fun I have had in a game in quite some time. In my current playthrough I have become a big fan of the explosive

Yeah, the combat encounters are incredible. Even if you don't like the story, the game is still a blast to play.

It's a shame there isn't more talk about how well this game plays because people are having psychotic breakdowns over the size of Abby's biceps.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: EDMIX

Bartski

Member
Jan 15, 2020
3,223
8,244
685
Katowice
Fucking deserved. My goty 2020. Maybe even my game of the generation.
Americans showing once again how bad their taste in video games are!
game of the generation.
I'm not a cuck so I'm not gonna buy and play the game.
Best game of the last generation by a country mile.
TLOU2 is objective trash and should be recognized for being a disgusting fetish project by a subhuman high on his own smug.
That's awesome and deserved, the game is too good.
disappointing but expected.
Well deserved, it's such an amazing game.
That's a shame
Best game ever made. The other two are great as well, but TLoU2 is in its own league.
Great game. Well deserved.
Personally, this disgusts me, but it is what it is.
TLoU2 is a goat and forever will be.
Best game ever made.

 

tassletine

Member
Oct 24, 2007
1,529
620
1,235
Thats nice and all, but this is just a fictional video game, its not that serious...



I disagree. He makes mistakes in part 1, he makes mistakes in part 2. Bill even warns Joel that his actions will get him killed on day, he himself states you can't out run your past...the game ends with you killing a doctor in a scene you can't skip and killing Marlene. I think many of us already knew he would die based on those actions, for years I though Marlene's family would come to kill him lol

So buddy, the fucking man makes mistakes, he is human, he literally makes several in the first game, do you not understand that the fucking person that made the story, might have already written is death BEFORE any of us ever heard of The Last Of Us?

I myself have written things where the ending is already planned, so I doubt that he wrote him to live and then was like "no bro, lets kill him now", too many things occur in the first game that show you he is flawed, makes mistakes and his death will come from something like that.

Fuck, you could argue he is "fool" for trusting the 2 bothers in the very first game or even trusting BILL in the very first game. It is in his nature to do this to really be making it sound like in part 2 its this brand new shit.



Incorrect bud. The person that literally wrote the series is the same person you are talking about that wrote part 1 and 2 and any of the things you are talking about exist in part 1.



Ummmm suuuuuuuure. Don't watch films rated R and don't play games rated M, those are for adults bud, many games exist with happy go lucky family friendly furry things rated PG, G, E etc.

Sounds like zero adult situations are allowed, thus maybe don't play or watch content created for adults. Things like this happen in real life.... anyone getting triggered by this doesn't need to play such things then if they get so upset over it.

Edit. Once again, this is why the medium for some is too young for shit like this. Gamers can't handle something like American History X if it was a game, if they are crying over this.

Play something else and stop trying to force developers to make static, comic, happy go lucky junk. Go play Call Of Duty or comic book game etc if you want that. Its clear from the beginning The Last Us was NEVER a series about folks NEVER DYING and everyone living and no one getting hurt etc.
I think this post and the reply gets to the heart of the problem with this game, at least for me.

LOU2 wants to have it's cake and eat it as well. The game clearly relishes realism, with multiple amazing touches to the animation and a 'mature' story.

But I don't think it's much of the sort. It has a standard videogame story (revenge, you are the monster you fight)

It's not realistic and relies heavily on the defense something along the lines of "people are complicated, they do weird things sometimes".
And whilst this is true it negates one of the prime reasons for fiction -- That it is supposed to boil down life's complications into a form that is digestible to it's target audience.

Now I would argue that the key audience for this game is teenage girls -- And given the hyperbolic overexagerattion of emotions at play, that fits right into that line of fiction
-- But to an adult audience that sort of thing isn't that much different to the hyperbole we find in almost all videogames, unless you want to dig into the details.
It's the reason Twilight did so well. It entrances teenagers, but to adults reliving that part of their lives is not something that they're interested in because it's so embarrassing.

To someone who's young, and deeply invested in the characters, I believe LOU2 would seem real and it definitely connects, but to a more jaded audience it doesn't appear to -- And for me seeing a lead character acting through folly, does not make an interesting story.

Ellie's arc is very basic. Less of an arc, more a ramping up of an emotion followed by a nervous breakdown.
Whilst this is psychologically accurate, it's not enough to sustain a story of 30 hours, especially when the other lead is basically going through almost exactly the same arc. Drawing comparisons between the two is intellectually interesting but it ruins the pace of the story and feels heavy handed. Like it's making a point -- but really can't decide on what that point is. That's left up to you.

And given that. I came to the conclusion that the story shouldn't be taken at face value, simply because it's so ridiculous and ends on an ironic joke. There is lots of satire in the game, and I think Neil Druckman was satirising his fight with Amy Henning here -- Amy (Abby) being the one who leaves for the island, where Neil (Ellie) is stuck without his nemesis and the right tools for the job, no energy left, playing a sad song.
I think it's deeply personal, but that's my own conclusion and I am unable to back that up with anything really substantial, except that Neil seems like the type who wants to bear his soul.
 

Woggleman

Member
Jan 1, 2020
2,128
3,301
445
I can understand people having an issue with Last Jedi because Star Wars was about good and evil where the good guys won but TLOU series from the jump was a dark game about shades of grey. There are no clear cut villians and heroes except for maybe David and The Rattlers. Wanting it to be some cheerful happy lucky game is the same as wanting Mario Kart to be a gritty and brutal game.
 

Porcile

Member
Oct 23, 2012
5,554
1,919
770
Muscular woman vs Skinny black kid vs 5'4″ Asian.

The American people have chosen
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,078
5,567
750
With Joel, it's been 5 years since we saw him. He has been living in a loving and caring community, no longer in survival mode, no longer dealing in guns and torturing/killing people. He has a "daughter" to look after. His new life softened his heart and his brothers. I can accept the changes in his character.

The passage of time changes people.
You still had Joel being careful in the flashback(telling Ellie to wear the mask) and protective(Scolding Jessie about sending her on patrol). The patrols also were something important to the town as Jessie lays out to the slacking Ellie and Dina. Also doesn't make sense that he'd go soft now that he more things to fight for and each time he goes out he sees what Jackson town could turn into if they're not careful. They still had to dealt with bandit which I doubt they handled with silk gloves.

Joel may have gone softer, doesn't mean he'd also get stupider.
 
Last edited:

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
You still had Joel being careful in the flashback(telling Ellie to wear the mask) and protective(Scolding Jessie about sending her on patrol). The patrols also were something important to the town as Jessie lays out to the slacking Ellie and Dina. Also doesn't make sense that he'd go soft now that he more things to fight for and each time he goes out he sees what Jackson town could turn into if they're not careful. They still had to dealt with bandit which I doubt they handled with silk gloves.

Joel may have gone softer, doesn't mean he'd also get stupider.
Joel was forced to follow Abby for safety. Joel was also cautious which you can see in demeanor, which Neil Druckmann also stated.

People who think Joel was being dumb based on how the writers wrote him doesn't hold water.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,078
5,567
750
Joel was forced to follow Abby for safety. Joel was also cautious which you can see in demeanor, which Neil Druckmann also stated.

People who think Joel was being dumb based on how the writers wrote him doesn't hold water.
The part up to "safehouse" I have little issue with, other than being contrived, it's that he walks in the middle of a room like that with a lot of armed strangers which raises eyebrows without asking some questions first.

Have you heard of the concept "Death of the author"? Zack Snyder can say that only 5000 people died when Superman and Zod were fighting in Metropolis with all that destruction and the World Engine, it doesn't map with the events on screen. Neil Druckmann can say that Joel was cautious, he doesn't act like it (enough).
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
The part up to "safehouse" I have little issue with, other than being contrived, it's that he walks in the middle of a room like that with a lot of armed strangers which raises eyebrows without asking some questions first.

Have you heard of the concept "Death of the author"? Zack Snyder can say that only 5000 people died when Superman and Zod were fighting in Metropolis with all that destruction and the World Engine, it doesn't map with the events on screen. Neil Druckmann can say that Joel was cautious, he doesn't act like it (enough).
What he said is exactly whats shown on screen so your comparison is not good. He also said his back was towards abby while he was looking at the others because he didnt aee abby as the threat.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,078
5,567
750
What he said is exactly whats shown on screen so your comparison is not good. He also said his back was towards abby while he was looking at the others because he didnt aee abby as the threat.
I don't take the author's input as the gospel, I take what's been shown in the game(s) and Joel's been shown as not that trusting of strangers before and even later on in the game yet he follows the group of strangers without question.

I can buy that Joel and Tommy were a little more trusting of Abby after what they'd been through, their survival instincts should've kicked in again when confronted with armed strangers whose purpose for being there was unknown to them. The strange logical leap you seem to make is that not seeing Abby as a threat = not seeing Abby's companions as a threat.
 

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
I don't take the author's input as the gospel, I take what's been shown in the game(s) and Joel's been shown as not that trusting of strangers before and even later on in the game yet he follows the group of strangers without question.

I can buy that Joel and Tommy were a little more trusting of Abby after what they'd been through, their survival instincts should've kicked in again when confronted with armed strangers whose purpose for being there was unknown to them. The strange logical leap you seem to make is that not seeing Abby as a threat = not seeing Abby's companions as a threat.
You don't take it because don't want to accept it.

Joel was willing follow Henry and Sam, which blows your argument out of the water. There's nothing in the game that says or shows he completely trusted them. He was willing to follow Abby for safety because they were all out of options like Tommy told him.

You're the master of spinning things and you're doing it again lol.
 

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,078
5,567
750
You don't take it because don't want to accept it.

Joel was willing follow Henry and Sam, which blows your argument out of the water. There's nothing in the game that says or shows he completely trusted them. He was willing to follow Abby for safety because they were all out of options like Tommy told him.

You're the master of spinning things and you're doing it again lol.
Because, as surprising it may sound to you, Neil Druckmann is not an infallible writer, no one is. If writers need to provide interpretations of their work then it seems to me that they didn't such a good job.

What are you on about? They got into a fight first, Joel expressed concern about working with them. Henry made a good point about kids which lowered their guard a bit. This scene flows so much better than what we got in TLOU2.
 
Last edited:

DForce

Member
Nov 23, 2017
5,197
10,082
575
Because, as surprising it may sound to you, Neil Druckmann is not an infallible writer, no one is. If writers need to provide interpretations of their work then it seems to me that they didn't such a good job.

He didn't need to. He just confirmed what people already knew by watching the scene.

What are you on about? They got into a fight first, Joel expressed concern about working with them. Henry made a good point about kids which lowered their guard a bit. This scene flows so much better than what we got in TLOU2.
"Lowered their guard a bit."


Then you can say Joel lowered his guard a bit because Abby helped Tommy and Joel fight off the infected. It still doesn't change the fact they Joel trusted strangers in both games to some degree.
 

KungFucius

Member
Jul 16, 2008
2,144
1,056
1,280
Come on man, that's just straight up disingenuous.

I'll explain this simply, though I am far from the first to do so.

People do grow to love characters they watch, play as etc.

This is entirely normal. Entertainment is designed to get the audience to connect with the characters (usually).

Characters are built on several things including personalities, the conflicts they endure, the way they overcome etc. It's called character development. Luke Skywalker goes on the archetypal heroes journey etc.

The Star Wars sequels destroyed Luke Skywalker's character and the journey he went on.

TLoU2 made Joel out to be a fool in direct contrast to part 1.

Both of these out of left field changes in their characters occurred because the writers that were in charge at the time had personal political views they wanted to inject into these stories. Totally nonsensical views for many that had nothing to do with the established characters. That point about being established is critically important. I don't care about The Last of Us really, but I did enjoy the first one. I grew up loving Star Wars. Couldn't care less now. They completely ruined what the first trilogy was about, what it's characters went through, what they earned and on and on and on. And that's it, I've let it go, and life goes on. But don't say it didn't happen or that it's the audience's fault. That's absurd. That's like saying if Rian Johnson had Luke put on heels and decide he wanted to be a burlesque dancer from a galaxy far, far away, that an upset audience was just having a "weird thing about ownership." Get the heck out of here with that bull.

Yes people who grew to like or love these characters can be disappointed, angry, upset, whatever they want. It's their right to feel that way. It has nothing to do with "ownership" and probably more to do with massive disappointment with what they saw happen with characters they loved.

Life is dark enough. People don't need BS examples made of their heroes at the alter of the political flavor of the day.


Sounds like paranoia. These changes weren't because of political views, they were just what the author wanted to write. I thought Luke was the biggest bad ass in all of Star Wars after what he did in Last Jedi. Him being depressed fit the Story and he snapped out of it when needed. Joel just helped someone and got killed because it was a revenge story that started with Abby getting revenge on Joel. It wasn't about the authors shitting on your characters with their political views.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad

Ulysses 31

Member
Nov 24, 2013
7,078
5,567
750
He didn't need to. He just confirmed what people already knew by watching the scene.
Yes people could see where the scene was leading to and it felt forced and unnatural for established characters like Joel and Tommy.
"Lowered their guard a bit."


Then you can say Joel lowered his guard a bit because Abby helped Tommy and Joel fight off the infected. It still doesn't change the fact they Joel trusted strangers in both games to some degree.
The kid also had them as gunpoint and didn't shoot indicating that they weren't such "bad" people, this also helped to be a little more trusting of them. In TLOU2 there's no such scene with Abby's crew. A scene with the Miller bro's bonding a little with Abby's crew before Joel's final moments would've helped, even if I personally think their guards would've been up the whole time to not fall in such a trap.
 
Last edited: