Overhyped : The Last of Us - Games

[QUOTE=hakimhakim;41161406]Maybe its my mistake to put so much hope into this game, but it cant be helped when it was advertised like a beast lol. The abundance of games nowdays might make coming up with original ideas a little bit difficult, but sometimes the companies themselves didnt want to explore new ideas, because they wanted to stick with what proven to sell. Some developers also complained about this, like Keiji Inafune.[/QUOTE] You remember Dead Island Cinematic Trailer ? that was a shitload of hype there , and what ended with? a fucked up game , I have put hope into that game , and it dissapointed me so hard , but not with The Last Of Us , Developers continued to keep me hyped up and i did not got dissapointed with it , and for the part of companies dont wanting to explore new ideas , i think that the major problem with that in our generation of games is the famous piece of shi* that CoD Is.

[QUOTE=hakimhakim;41161222]I really hope such a good-looking games would be developed with more original gameplay lol.[/QUOTE] Tell me a game that TLOU's gameplay is copying. If you just say "any third-person shooter" then I'll laugh.

[QUOTE=MasterAenox;41161360] I've just hit the final part on FrankiePCin1080p Walkthrough and i have to disagree with you , but i enjoyed each second of that gameplay footage , but yet , i think i would be more pleased if it was me playing on my little ps3[/QUOTE] Fair enough, you enjoyed the story. But you still missed out on what makes a game: the interaction and gameplay. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I bet there was some point in that play through were you lost satisfaction because the guy playing didn't do what you wanted him to do.

[QUOTE=PieClock;41161483]Fair enough, you enjoyed the story. But you still missed out on what makes a game: the interaction and gameplay. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I bet there was some point in that play through were you lost satisfaction because the guy playing didn't do what you wanted him to do.[/QUOTE] The game itself doesn't have much of a "alternative options" like , save this guy and get rewarded , the only frustration i had is the ammount of ammo the guy left behind

[QUOTE=MasterAenox;41161461]You remember Dead Island Cinematic Trailer ? that was a shitload of hype there , and what ended with? a fucked up game , I have put hope into that game , and it dissapointed me so hard , but not with The Last Of Us , Developers continued to keep me hyped up and i did not got dissapointed with it , and for the part of companies dont wanting to explore new ideas , i think that the major problem with that in our generation of games is the famous piece of shi* that CoD Is.[/QUOTE] The problem with our generation is not games like Call of Duty, that is only the symptom of the larger problem. Its cost. Games are to expensive to make for how much you risk. If you have a successful formula you stick to it, you don't stray to far from that because you have a choice, you can take a risk and your studio can be shut down, or you can keep your friends employed and working on something you love. Its not as simple as simply saying buh bye to half the team either, nor is it as simple as reducing an advertising budget. Publishers aren't funding the games with this much money because they love to spend money. They're trying to pinch all the money they can, they've examined how much they need to spend down to the last dime. If publishers try to reduce content, they run into gamers trying to lynch them because "same cost, less content, what the fuck man?". There is a reason companies are moving to free to play and downloadable content.

[QUOTE=Frosty701;41160922]Playing the game is a completely different experience than watching let's plays on Youtube.[/QUOTE] except for the fact that he's right in that it is mainly a corridor shooter, in fact is. it's completely linear. [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=PieClock;41161483]Fair enough, you enjoyed the story. But you still missed out on what makes a game: the interaction and gameplay. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I bet there was some point in that play through were you lost satisfaction because the guy playing didn't do what you wanted him to do.[/QUOTE] i don't think you understand exactly. someone can tell how a game is just from watching a lets play. the person watching has already played games before and can gather a pretty good idea of what it's like just from watching.

[B]someone can tell how a game is just from watching a lets play. the person watching has already played games before and can gather a pretty good idea of what it's like just from watching[/B]. Yes , you can tell how a game is from watching it , but nothing replaces experimenting the game for yourself

i'm actually playing the game myself and i'm being put off by its insanely linear nature. i'm starting to hate these corridor games where all it is is just one area after another. this game would have been cooler if it was actually open. it isn't in the slightest. the only thing it has going for it are large maps that allow for lots of exploration. but its pacing is a tightly woven single line of string from one area to the next. i'm starting to tire of this model in games. i just got metro last light and it does the same thing. we've been doing this fucking model of area after area for literally forever.

[QUOTE=darkrei9n;41161519]The problem with our generation is not games like Call of Duty, that is only the symptom of the larger problem. Its cost. Games are to expensive to make for how much you risk. If you have a successful formula you stick to it, you don't stray to far from that because you have a choice, you can take a risk and your studio can be shut down, or you can keep your friends employed and working on something you love. Its not as simple as simply saying buh bye to half the team either, nor is it as simple as reducing an advertising budget. Publishers aren't funding the games with this much money because they love to spend money. They're trying to pinch all the money they can, they've examined how much they need to spend down to the last dime. If publishers try to reduce content, they run into gamers trying to lynch them because "same cost, less content, what the fuck man?". There is a reason companies are moving to free to play and downloadable content.[/QUOTE] Yeah, i remembered when Keiji said that nearly 100/200 people are working on a title at a time. Leaving the issue of whether its really necessary to have that many people, thats a lot of mouth to feed. The upper-ups just cant afford to take risk with that million dollars, so they analyzed what sell nowdays (CoD, Uncharted) and tried to implement their gameplay into their new game, however overused it is. They had to make another AAA title. If there's any sign of a game will not reaching multi-million buyers, they'll cancel it (Megaman Legends 3).

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161540]i don't think you understand exactly. someone can tell how a game is just from watching a lets play. the person watching has already played games before and can gather a pretty good idea of what it's like just from watching.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand exactly. You do not get the full experience of a game by watching someone play it. You can get a feel of it, sure, but you cannot get the full experience. If you could then I wouldn't bother buying any games because I'd just watch them on youtube.

[QUOTE=hakimhakim;41161597]Yeah, i remembered when Keiji said that nearly 100/200 people are working on a title at a time. Leaving the issue of whether its really necessary to have that many people, thats a lot of mouth to feed. The upper-ups just cant afford to take risk with that million dollars, so they analyzed what sell nowdays (CoD, Uncharted) and tried to implement their gameplay into their new game, however overused it is. They had to make another AAA title. If there's any sign of a game will not reaching multi-million buyers, they'll cancel it (Megaman Legends 3).[/QUOTE] Don't forget the hundreds to potentially thousands that a publisher has in marketing, financial, basically just managing every other aspect that a publisher needs to do. Every studio underneath a publisher also works towards making sure those peoples stay employed as well.

[QUOTE=MasterAenox;41161585] Yes , you can tell how a game is from watching it , but nothing replaces experimenting the game for yourself[/QUOTE] as someone who has watched lets plays of a game and then played the game i can conclusively say that at least my brain is able to amply simulate how that game would be in my hands. just because you can't do something doesn't mean other people can't do it either. i know it's hard to understand because you can't do it, but it's possible. [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=PieClock;41161611]I don't think you understand exactly. You do not get the full experience of a game by watching someone play it. You can get a feel of it, sure, but you cannot get the full experience. If you could then I wouldn't bother buying any games because I'd just watch them on youtube.[/QUOTE] i never said full experience. if you look in the post above it says ample experience

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161596]i'm actually playing the game myself and i'm being put off by its insanely linear nature. i'm starting to hate these corridor games where all it is is just one area after another. this game would have been cooler if it was actually open. it isn't in the slightest. the only thing it has going for it are large maps that allow for lots of exploration. but its pacing is a tightly woven single line of string from one area to the next. i'm starting to tire of this model in games. i just got metro last light and it does the same thing. we've been doing this fucking model of area after area for literally forever.[/QUOTE] Because it's a [B]story driven game[/B]. Not to mention that this is on a [B]console[/B] that is severely pushing its graphical limitations. The game wouldn't work if it was open because the entire story is getting from Boston to Philadelphia and then finally to [sp]Salt Lake City[/sp] It seems like you don't like story driven games at all so why are you buying them?

The main and only reason why i did not bought this piece of art is becouse i've lost my ps3 controller , and i regret every this every time i go to youtube watch a video of the game

deus ex human revolution was a story driven game [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;41161639]Because it's a [b]story driven game[/b]. Not to mention that this is on a [b]console[/b] that is severely pushing its graphical limitations. The game wouldn't work if it was open because the entire story is getting from Boston to that university. It seems like you don't like story driven games at all so why are you buying them?[/QUOTE] this is just the worst excuse ever. it's fucking bullshit and it makes me double facepalm. all you're doing by saying this kind of shit is perpetuating the notion that somehow this is okay for a game to be a totally on rails experience. it's not because it's fucking one sided and boring as hell. also you're just coming up with reasons for these people to keep pushing this sub par product. needless to say the demand for innovation grows, the amount of innovation does as well. a game doesn't need to be a bland on rails experience to be story driven or engrossing. in fact there are many games that are story driven and engrossing and are sandbox games.

if the story was of them getting from boston to philly then why didn't the developers just create a giant expanse between those two places and that's the game map? it would be completely possible to have the same exact story. some people would just have to actually think harder.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161647]deus ex human revolution was a story driven game [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] this is just the worst excuse ever. it's fucking bullshit and it makes me double facepalm. all you're doing by saying this kind of shit is perpetuating the notion that somehow this is okay for a game to be a totally on rails experience. it's not because it's fucking one sided and boring as hell. also you're just coming up with reasons for these people to keep pushing this sub par product. needless to say the demand for innovation grows, the amount of innovation does as well. a game doesn't need to be a bland on rails experience to be story driven or engrossing. in fact there are many games that are story driven and engrossing and are sandbox games.[/QUOTE] You have not played the game, you are trying to tell people who have played the game that the game sucks. Do you see the problem with this? This is like a blind man telling people who can see that the sun is green.

This game is giving me mad feels, and I'm not even to the end yet. You shut your whore mouth.

i don't know what the fuck you're talking about because i have played the game and i have never said it sucks.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161647]deus ex human revolution was a story driven game [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] this is just the worst excuse ever. it's fucking bullshit and it makes me double facepalm. all you're doing by saying this kind of shit is perpetuating the notion that somehow this is okay for a game to be a totally on rails experience. it's not because it's fucking one sided and boring as hell. also you're just coming up with reasons for these people to keep pushing this sub par product. needless to say the demand for innovation grows, the amount of innovation does as well. a game doesn't need to be a bland on rails experience to be story driven or engrossing. in fact there are many games that are story driven and engrossing and are sandbox games.[/QUOTE] The Last of Us is focusing on Joel's story, not the world. If it were trying to focus on the world more than yes, a sandbox would be more appropriate but it's not. A lot of the smaller tidbits inside the game would be lost if it were completely open. [editline]24th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161682]if the story was of them getting from boston to philly then why didn't the developers just create a giant expanse between those two places and that's the game map? it would be completely possible to have the same exact story. some people would just have to actually think harder.[/QUOTE] Because it would lose ALL of its smaller conversations and general bonding with characters if it did.

why do you say these things like you know what you're talking about? have you attempted to make a game like this and utterly failed? this kind of thing isn't made thinking about it one sided and in black and white. [editline]23rd June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;41161699] Because it would lose ALL of its smaller conversations and general bonding with characters if it did.[/QUOTE] how

watching someone play a game is boring??? wow thats weird i dont understand how that happen

these things dont need to be on rails to work. there's no definitive proof for that

You seem to believe you would have the perfect formula for it as well if it were open. So tell me how they would incorporate all of those tense moments in an open world version of Last of Us such as (spoilers) [sp]Ellie's confrontation with the cannibals, meeting Sam and Henry, the sewer portion with Sam and Henry, the sniper, the school with Bill, the armored vehicle hunting you down when in Hunter territory[/sp] If it were open world it would most likely have quests instead to progress the story and then what do you know it's still linear regardless.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161682]if the story was of them getting from boston to philly then why didn't the developers just create a giant expanse between those two places and that's the game map? it would be completely possible to have the same exact story. some people would just have to actually think harder.[/QUOTE] Open world games are not story driven in the same way as TLOU is because the player has the freedom to do whatever he wants in between, and it removes the ability completely to have cinematic sequences that are there to add immersion and drive the story.

[QUOTE=darkrei9n;41161615]Don't forget the hundreds to potentially thousands that a publisher has in marketing, financial, basically just managing every other aspect that a publisher needs to do. Every studio underneath a publisher also works towards making sure those peoples stay employed as well.[/QUOTE] The attitude of some companies is not very admirable either. For example, Megaman Legends 3 was practically finished, but Capcom cancelled it, just because there's not enough 'serbots'/member in their website to reach 1,000,000 head to sell the game to, and doing so while blaming the gamers. Its also highly suspected that the game was cancelled because capcom higher-ups hate Inafune who tried to bring in western developers, so that the japanese/capcom break free from safe game formula. The company got too big, and the developer/people who actually make the games are on the lowest of the food chain, so they cannot make everything they like, even if their idea is interesting, if its not proven to sell.

[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;41161759]You seem to believe you would have the perfect formula[/QUOTE] ha, dont blow smoke up my collective asses. you're all focusing on how well some archaic old tried and true method is so well for telling a story only because it has been tried and true. impossible has been said to many times to count in this industry. you are the crusty old demographic going harumph! and i am the person who will be laughing a few years down the line.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161647]deus ex human revolution was a story driven game[/QUOTE] I wouldn't really call DE:HR open world. There were the hubs but all the story-centered parts were in linear areas of the game. Not to mention that in that game you stay in the same locations for long periods of time, because it fit the game. TLOU is a game where you're on a journey, it wouldn't make sense to stay in one part of the city and say "hold on Ellie, we can put off delivering you to your destination for a couple days, I gotta go do this side-mission." Like other people have been saying, certain games are more powerfully driven when told linearly.

[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;41161746]these things dont need to be on rails to work. there's no definitive proof for that[/QUOTE] I agree, they don't need to be on rails. However, different stories require different approaches, and The Last of Us' story works quite well when told in sections. It's a shame you don't find it interesting, but I don't think making it open world would work. As said, it would lose many of its small touches (because logistically it'd be a nightmare to write that much material, record that much material, and design that much material), and the pacing would be shaky at best. Plus, the cinematics (as mentioned above by PieClock) would be non-existent. Just because something could enhance the gameplay does [i]not[/i] mean it would help the story. Maybe Half-Life 2 would be slightly more interesting to some people if it had horses, but that doesn't mean that Valve are stubborn sell outs who don't do anything innovative. Besides, why the fuck would you put horses in Half-Life 2?

[QUOTE=hakimhakim;41160909]Uncharted that makes me sleepy in the first 10 minutes.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=hakimhakim;41160850]... but when I started to fall asleep in 10 minutes after he plays, something must be wrong.[/QUOTE] I know what's wrong. You're narcoleptic.