The Last of Us Part 2 Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 31 лип 2020
- My Last of Us 1 review can be found here:
• The Last of Us Review
I didn't want to censor the violence or profanity, as a result this video has limited ads. If you'd like to support me another way I'm on Patreon:
/ matthewmatosis
There's a tiny spoiler for Odin Sphere in this video too, not worth worrying about I think.
There's a few instances of flashing lights but also probably not anything to worry about. - Ігри
"At this point, the characters need to keep a low profile"
*SO ANYWAYS, I STARTED BLASTING*
Such a great moment. :D
Sooo endearing... *We kinda, sorta shooouuuld, but naaah.*
💥 - - - 🔫😋
@@GerSHAK p
Blasting - Subtronics
"I figured I'd hit something sooner or later!"
"i've only been living in the apocalipse for a few months..."
the extremely dry way you said it made me giggle
@@BugVlogs go outside
@@ffnovice7 seethe
Did you giggle like a highschool girl? That's the important part here.
lol at him comparing a bad flu season to a zombie season.😂
Apocalypse* Shit should auto correct for you but you may have butchered it too fucking bad lmao
37:30 thank you for saying this. TLOU 1 ambiguous ending was one the reasons I loved the story. A sequel never seemed necessary to me.
Totally agree. Not needing a sequel is very much the underlying problem with part 2 overall imo.
c _a_ p _i_ t _a_ l _i_ s _m_
@@lettuceprime4922 not even close. Don't bring that up.
@@Gadget-Walkmen - I think I will bring it up.
@@lettuceprime4922 It's most certainly not because of captialism.
One issue you failed to mention was the scene where Ellie looks directly into the camera and says "truly this is The Last Of Us Part 2" didn't really work for me, it felt forced and would've worked better if Joel said it in a flashback.
Joel perfectly described this game
"They made a sequel, wasn't very good"
The part where Abby looked into Joel's eyes and said "I'm going to call you an n-word" really threw me off, if Joel said that to Abby instead I think the scene would've worked better. Because of that, in its current state my rating for this game is 3/10.
Another problem I noticed is that after Ellie kills the disobedient dog, she calls it "Stupid Dog", but in the credits it's listed as "Naughty Dog".
We need more Anthony Fantano meme comments in videogame review threads lmao
Luke Kelleher the sequel was amazing wym
Just dropping by to say that it's entirely possible to restring a guitar so that it can be played with the opposite hand. That is all.
That's not the point of the scene... or the entire game, for that matter.
Interesting, though. I didn't know that.
Yeah but it can be a nightmare to switch hands. You basically have to relearn how to play.
You don't even need to restring the whole guitar. Tape a few of your fingers together and see that it's still perfectly viable. You aren't gonna be sounding like Eric Clapton but it's not impossible.
@@danielleanderson6371 Which could have been a possible ending, the idea of starting over could have been represented visually that way.
Django Reinhardt exists too
Absolutely lost it at "-it seems as though Ellie has retained her humanity and become The Last of Us 2".
Matthew is always funny when he tries
*_WELL ELLIE_*
She truly was the last of us part 2
Maybe the real Last of Us 2 were the friends we made along the way
It really makes you FEEL like "The Last of Us 2 TM"
I can't even begin to tell you how refreshing the writing of your reviews are when it comes to game analysis.
No screaming. No blatantly influence regurgitations from around the internet. 10/10.
@@Boxxcutter Exactly
Truly! This channel is easily one of, if not, the best when it comes to cerebral video game focused content. The writing style is also feels so perfect and concise; nothing seems overdone in the slightest.
I absolutely agree. His ability to remain objective and be so thorough in his analysis is damn impressive. Love the work. This man deserves more subs.
Even thou I love Mauler, Matthew is the god when it comes down to analysis, almost 2 points per minute showing evidence and avoiding opinions when he is trying to make a point. I agree, he might be very well the best reviewer I ever followed.
To me, this game reinforces the fact that the video gaming medium is still too eager to mimick the cinematic medium, instead of playing on his own strengths. Flashbacks and cutscenes with unavoidable outcomes can lead towards an "interactive movie experience", more than a videogame. So, I think the reaction of the player to this game is mostly based on how much one agrees to "live a movie", and forgive the weaknesses of its script.
Exactly the same problem as in Red Dead Redemption 2
Unless those games are about time-travel, there is no point of having playable flashbacks that have no effect to the main gameplay.
Coolio M you act as if not being able to see previous events in the timeline and just told about try em is better than just simply playing/ visually seeing them.
Games can have flashbacks to depict character moments but it shouldn’t be as frequent.
@@Gadget-Walkmen Nah, I doubt most players would find it fun/unique/interesting being an onlooker of a unchangeable "past" segment in which you can't disrupt it & have to play through until the main game plot starts. We don't need more games like Beyond Two Souls with it's jumbled up timeline.
_Since there were tension-breaking interactive flashbacks, in which you can die lmao, why not have some change to it's story in someway?_
_Like going to the music store & have players choose which instrument you can play in the future/main gameplay?_
Legendary Super Semite there not there for “artistry”. They are are there for the sake of show casting previous events either for the audience to get a emotional attachment from them or trying to depict what happened in the past for key story info like what The Last Guardian did having a cutscene in what happened for the plot to start.
nobody can say anything about the speed of your reviews anymore cause something of this quality in a bit over a month from the game's release is crazy. thanks matt, you're the best at what you do and no one's come close
Superbunnyhop is decent
Agreed... and if I can impose: people should throw a buck or two at his Patreon as well. Even a sum of $12/year shouldn't be anything to balk at.
Joseph Anderson is more my cup of tea, but matthewmitosis isn't bad by any means. sometimes the structure of his videos feels all over the place though
sahil signorile when Joseph Anderson’s videos are good, they really are excellent. However when they’re bad, they’re downright infuriating to listen to. His soma review is what I would cite as an example of some of his worst work. But nonetheless, Joseph Anderson does make some incredible videos. His video on the witness is particularly good
EDIT: accidentally replied to the wrong person
Deus Vult That’s my opinion of it as well, and I’m not sure why. I don’t always agree with Matthew but I am never infuriated like I am with Anderson. Granted, I disagree with Anderson more often, but I wonder if it’s something about the presentation.
"Abby's crew range from completely unlikable dickhead to just plain boring." Made me spit my drink out. Such great delivery.
SavingABabyKitten god I hated the new characters.
@@josephabrams8529 Are you sure you didn't love them? Try telling yourself you did and then see how you feel about them.
Hated Manny especially, he was so clearly made to be the likeable funny cool guy to get us roped into Abby's world.
TheUnholyOne ...why?
@@josephabrams8529
Twas a joke. You can't just flip your emotions around, you can't just pretend you like something.
18:32
"Tommy wastes his ambush attempt against Abby, maybe he lost his infinite ammo bandana."
Fucking bury me lmao
run the jewels
The message of the game is to never leave survivors, as the cycle of revenge is only perpetuated through showing mercy.
Yet you murder countless names characters on your way to come to this conclusion at the person you hate the most. I feel like this needed more setup than oh now I’m done killing people mercilessly. This should have been the story of the third game, and not the second I think. It’s not a terrible idea, it’s just not executed in a satisfying way
@@Aldoz let me have a flashback mid murder to a memory about a person who was very dear to me and was murdered by the person who I am currently trying to murder. Oh and my hand hurts, because half the fingers were bitten off 10 seconds ago by the same person. Ah, I think I finally found it in me to forgive and let the murderer go. What a load of shit.
@@crimsonpotemkin No no no, it totally makes sense. You're just coming from it from the perspective of a human being. You need to think of it from the point of view of a monster, like Neil Druckmann.
If you, say, abused hundreds of employees, fired someone for being sexually harassed, or treated people like shit because you're jealous of their writing talent and tired of them telling you to reign in the self-inserts, wouldn't you want them to forgive you? Y'know, without *doing* anything to earn forgiveness?
The irony
Also that mercy means every single character or Npc killed on the way to abbey was for nothing if they wanted to have a really hard hitting ending have Abby explain herself and expect to be killed by Ellie and Ellie thinks about how many people she killed to get here and how many people she knew that got killed getting her there so then killing abbey would be more of a having the hands of the dead pulled the trigger type thing
I kept thinking the same thing while playing lol
I really appreciate your comments about the constant switching of perspectives and how it makes you feel like playing a scripted role rather than having real control of the game. The boss fight against Ellie annoyed me because it felt like the clearest example of this in that Ellie only loses the fight because we’re not playing as her. I sort of get that Naughty Dog were trying to make you embody different points of view but they never pulled it off as far as I’m concerned - it just made me feel jerked around.
I don't usually mind this perspective shift boss fight in other games where this is the case(no spoilers), so I'm not sure if I would here - but the whole authored/scripted experience thing is one aspect of games I'd love a video on if you make good on the threat to do some Topic videos, Matthew. It's the strongest feeling I'm left with from Uncharted 2 and that made it very clear these games aren't for me, that feeling of being an actor following along with a script only the director knows. And, at least in Uncharted 2, getting a face full of cinematic lead if I couldn't pick up on the cues.
It’s interesting because another reviewer said the same of the first game. I wanna say it was Noah Caldwell-Gervais’ review that discussed it. That levels were designed in a fashion that many encounters and events could be encouraging the players’ to take up a “role” of sorts in the game’s act.
Haven’t gotten to where he talks about it in this video yet as whether he took Noah’s review into account with that conclusion, but yeah.
Having a scripted role like that is the entire point of the game though. You don't have real control. You can't. This is not that kind of game.
@@Kriss_ch. what cues do you mean, that if you missed you'd be screwed?
@@intelligenceparadigm4931 Then why play it at all?
The comparison between introverted and extroverted is brilliant. It's probably the best explanation why some adore Naughty Dog games and some others believe them to be over rated.
Seriously, probably the #1 thing I took from this review that made me understand both sides of the story without seeing into their heads. It's obvious from someone's play style which of the two they are, and how the two mindsets impact how they enjoy the game.
It’s weird because I can totally get both sides. I love linear movie like games like The Last of Us just as much as agency focused games like DMC or The Witcher. Depends on the day I guess.
@empty shogun yeah my issue with ND games is sometimes the gameplay actually detracts from the story, not add to it. I also ended up watching this game first as a commentaryless playthrough first. (I've since played through it 3 times) but I actually think I would have enjoyed it less if I had played it through. All of the story beats just hit better when theres not two hours of gameplay inbetween them, altho I do believe you lose SOME of the impact in other manners.
@@lockekappa500
Im more into story than gameplay, but think there should be a balance.
I absolutely hated the story in this one but glad ya liked it
I still think there is more to it than that. As games, a lot of people love ND for their stories, but if it was a movie, eg Uncharted 4 wouldve been laughed out of the room with its story. TLOU prolly wouldve fared better as a movie, but it certainly wouldnt be celebrated in the way it is as a game.
I feel like you can do antagonists as characters in a story medium. Golden Sun and Lost Age served as a two part tale and you played as the protagonists in the first and the antagonists in the second. What was great about lost age was you eventually got that team to join you and you beat the game as one cohesive whole by the end. Isaac, having no voice at all in the first game, speaks out his quest in the second game that stays true to his character, much like how Felixs dialogue in the first game made his silence in the second give you a sense of how he ultimately has to join Isaac and realize the truth.
And these were on the Gameboy Advance. From the early 2000s. It was a turn based RPG but the story had alot for a handheld game to go through for dialogue and characters actually had depth and some arc to their own selves throughout the story. It ultimately brought them together. The way you could transfer your save from the first game over to the second and use the first team is a awesome way to preserve them as they were apart of the story.
Tons of games have done it, it's not really anything new or revolutionary.
@@nickelakon5369 I wouldn't say GS and TLA was innovative or anything either. It was something I personally experienced that I felt was cool. Point I was making was you can make it work to have that dual narrative as long as it's handled well. Risky or not. GS played it safe since Isaac's party never directly fights Felix's in either game. It was more about the greater picture that both parties realized Menardi, Saturnia, Agatio and Karst had their own reasons for lighting the lighthouses and they accepted that duty in a subtle way and came together to light the final one.
@Linda Niemkiewicz it's the writers quite literally forcing Abby into the plot and putting her on a pedestal while simultaneously damning Ellie and undo everything that she was defined by the first game for.
Doesn't want to be alone? Now she is.
Her switchblade that belonged to her mother is gone.
Joel is gone, the prominent character that became an important person in her life.
Dina was supposed to be with her now she's gone.
Tommy hates her for not killing Abby.
She is the one that lost the most from anyone and rendered her character the very thing she was trying to not be in the first game. Pretty sad that ND thought taking misery and making a big boy story out of it by cutting into the very characters themselves would be clever. We know now that will be their main mo. I personally just miss the old ND. Even before the first game. Jak and Daxter was their personal highlight to me. Shouldnt have catered to the masses to make these realistic stories because this is what happens when you give their ego way too much praise.
I wonder, if sandwich guy had murdered all of Ellie's friends & family, would she have forgiven him for his rude words? That seems to be the key.
No. You can kill thousands of people, but as long as you're tolerant of your neighbor it's fine. On the other hand, you a bigot you die a bigot.
One of my biggest gripes with TLOU2 is that, in some of the flashbacks, they're quite clearly different to the original game in an attempt to evoke sympathy for the other side.
If you need to warp your games history to evoke sympathy, I'm not going to feel sorry for my previous actions when I can see the manipulation. I'm going to feel hostility towards the developers lying to me in an attempt to pull strings that simply aren't there without buying into your revisionism.
Are you referring to the fireflies and Marlene? I went back and watched a lets play of the final part of the first game and was laughing at how openly antagonistic the fireflies were in that one. Guard escorting Joel out of the building so they can kill Ellie in peace says "give me a reason(to shoot you)" lmao. Flashbacks in Last of Us 2 are like here we are the super peaceful Fireflies and the only option is to kill a little girl/I wish there was another way. We also have kids and would hate to die and leave them orphaned. :(
@@dropthexd3277 in tlou1 its revealed in a file that ellie isnt the first child the fireflies have killed and they are no closer to a vaccine for the fungus, they were going to kill her for something they knew would have no results so joel was totally right to save her from them. this games attempts to paint joel as a monster who stopped what could have been the cure for the fungus is laughable at best and a slap to the face at worst.
@@incelliousthewizard7883 this is not true. There's no evidence that they found any other people that were immune
the most BS thing about this manipulative revisionism was how they told Ellie wanted to die in TLOU2, meanwhile in TLOU1 we literally have a powerful scenes between Ellie & Joel as she wanted to live, don't want to be alone, & Joel was the only one she got as everybody that she hold dear were dead. ND has totally lost its own narrative continuation at that point.
It really feels like TLOU2 is not being made for TLOU1 fans.
It's gaslighting of the player.
Finally, now Matthew can tell me my opinion on the game
You were rushing to type this message didnt you?
kek
Ah yes relatable
Hah! Nice one...
Just like when Anthony Fantano reviews an album and I can form an opinion afterwards
"...It feels like a rejection of the strengths and denial of the weaknesses inherent to the medium (27:50)" - Matthewmatosis.
I Think that is a great summary of this game, the director's intention and why the experience it tries to communicate doesn't work for so many people.
That is a good quote.
If there's one sentence to describe why this game missed the mark for so many people, its this sentence.
LockeKappa I also think “The Last of Us 2 almost feels like it’s less than the sum of it’s parts” is fairly prescient as well. It’s a bunch of high quality elements (for the most part) that never really coalesce into anything special.
@@josephabrams8529 And this is exactly what Mathew said about God of War 2018.
Felipe Tartas Another great review to be sure.
The biggest issue with switching perspectives so frequently is that the game is constantly trying to change my motivation. it starts out as just being routine, then it's to get revenge on someone we're made to hate, then it's to indulge in the museum flashback we know won't ever pay off and feel comfy with Joel, then it's back to revenge, then again, it's to indulge in Joel, then hatred again. The first half is constantly jumping back and forth between telling us to feel good and to feel hateful.
Then Abby's campaign comes in and it's even more jumbled; the character the game's told us to hate for the last 10 hours is now someone we're meant to be rooting for, and with such a significant amount of time working directly against her, many including myself just kept trying to throw her off every cliff I could find. This comes to a head in the Santa Barbra section where we're now jumping back and forth again multiple times within a few minutes of each other between having to hate one of our protagonists, and actively trying to help the one we've been hunting as the other to live out a good life.
Half of the time, i don't know how I should feel because the game is constantly trying to motivate me with inherently contradictory sources of encouragement.
also doesn’t help that these POV changes are extremely poorly placed
The feeling is supposed to be disjointed, as feelings are complex and don't line up with logic. The feeling is not the motivation for playing the game. The motivation to play the game is to feel, whether or not it contradicts each other (because that happens in real life, too).
@A Z Yes, but this is where I think the medium works against the story. In film, the audience is more willing to feel conflicted because they are watching a story unfold. They are being asked to do nothing but feel, the journey is taken for them. In a video game, you move the story forward. The character's motivation is as much yours as it is their's, because you are the driving factor deciding if they reach their ultimate goal in the end. That's why other games that introduce these kinds of elements often make the player character more morally grey or ambiguous, at least in their initial goals. Spec Ops: The Line gradually pulls the curtain up from over a generic military shooter, and the character's ultimate goals are still painted as at least somewhat heroic until the final stretch where it all comes crashing down. NieR Automata has the player switching between multiple perspectives in the final act, but both are working towards the same end goal, just with different motivations for doing so, and in the end the player gets to choose who they ultimately align with. The Last of Us 2 seems annoyed that it even has to be a game in the first place, and it's narrative doesn't consider the medium at all. Neil Druckmann simply doesn't have a firm enough grasp of game design and how it can influence storytelling to properly convey his message through the medium.
@A Z You see there's supposed to be half-assed excuses for all examples of our bad writing. Combined with meaningless word salad/verbal diarrhea. Just feeeeeeeelings bro
Reading TLOU2 criticisms like this makes me realize how weird I must be, because when I play a game with a story, I never view the story as MY motivation, I never feel that I have a hand in the story or it's themes, that's all the developer's job, and I'm just along for the ride, be it for movie games or mostly gameplay focused games, I just feel like I'm the hand that makes the player characters move and everything else is out of my concern.
Seeing Abby and Ellie's different motivations and actions doesn't make me feel weird or jerked around at all, I'm just happy to be there and let the story play out while I shoot zombies.
When Abby and Ellie fight I find it to be a cool moment because it's the two characters I've been playing as the whole game, but apparently lots of people find it absurd because it reveals how little control you have over the narrative, when that, to me, was obvious in the first place? It's so confusing to me.
16:39 I love how Matthew very subtly shifted his tone, as if to say wearily “I know a lot of you are only here for my thoughts on this controversial story, so let’s do this”
Your idea about mechanical extro- and introverts hits so close to home, sometimes I feel genuinely exhausted when I can't play and have to watch a cutscene.
Yeah, I like that one a lot - even though depending on the game and it's execution I can feel either of the two ways.
It's one of the main problems I had with gow4. Having to slow walk between areas when you're with freya or during certain sequences and then being outright blocked from moving by invisible walls until the cutscene gets to a certain point honestly bores the hell out of me.
With the dog patting...my contention would be that the dog at the start of Ellie's journey...you can walk past and ignore...whereas in both of the sections of Abby's journey when you are with a dog (as you have shown), the game locks you in a room and you are forced to play with the dog to proceed...this is completely contrived and just infuriated me because you can just see the strings of the writers saying, "look how clever we are. Isn't this dog awesome? You like dogs, don't you?" Got to be honest though, by that point in Abby's side, I was just apathetic to all of her 'feelings' scenes...and yes...I laughed my arse off at Ellie killing her in the 'boss fight' and also when Manny got his comeuppance.
Manny was the worst, I don't understand why there are people who like him.
@@ralelunar Manny is so clearly written to be a likable character that is comes off as way overly forced and ended up pushing myself and many off from him. My guess why some people like him is to some extent how much they have interacted with similar "cheap" likeable characters before. One may not notice how forced his likable-ness is if one hasn't experienced that trope often enough.
@@peckc16 i think what matt says about the zebra scene "working against abby, because it reveals the hand of the writer conspiring in her favor" really nails it. this is why so many people didn't connect with Abby and her story. after the reset, you are hit with a barrage of scenes and characters that are clearly meant to make Abby more likeable. Abby's nature hike with her dad, culminating in the zebra scene. her own home base with her dog that you are forced to pet and play fetch with. and her wacky comic relief friend that's supposed to be "likeable" even though we only know him as "the manbun guy who spit on joel's corpse".
on the subject of playing with her dog, i think its worth mentioning (albeit anecdotally) that every time ive seen someone's first playthough of that moment they always throw the ball outside of the cage to deliberately ruin the game of fetch. matt does it in this video at the 28:04 mark. it's like a desperate attempt to break the out of the "actor" role and go against the grain just to be a participant. it just goes to show how brilliant and seamless matt's writing and editing has become, he's able to introduce this clip as he's talking about petting a dog, but by the end of the clip you're thinking about the difference between what you want to do as a player, and what you're expected to do as someone controlling a character.
@@chastermief839 awesome response and yes than you for clarifying my point using Matt's language it's one of the reasons I find him to be among the best in game critiques. I mentioned else where how I remember a video on the history of game journalism and something that hit me was just how young the gaming industry is as a whole, and how the game critic field is even younger. Gamers are still developing language to critically examine games and I have always felt Matt finds a way to push beyond simple game reviews. For example his bit on some players using gameplay to store energy to expend during cinematics while others do the reverse seems so simple but really makes me think about how I play games in those terms.
As for the dog I just wanted to add that I too threw the ball outside the cage on my first try. 😂 I also tried to throw away the okushy and avoid Alice later on in the aquarium just to see if I could (you can't). Your comment made me think how I'm one of those people who instantly shoots AI companions/ NPCs just to see how the game responds 😂
@Linda Niemkiewicz Manny was the one who spat on Joel's corpse, and get's shot through the face by Tommy in the 'sniper' section...god that death was satisfying...unintentionally I would presume xD
15:59 so matthewmatosis, you have goopy goblin gamer brain?
I just rewatched that video and returned to this to rewatched it, what a happy coincidence.
Dog bless
@@bbs8942 هههههههههه
11:42 Doesn't sound insane at all to me. You look at a game like Alien: Isolation where for the vast majority of the game you can't make noise because you could attract the Xenomorph even if you've cleared past an area of androids or humans. I think the immersion would have been greater if you were constantly running the risk of luring clickers or nearby human enemies to your location by making noise EVEN after clearing out an area/level. That way, as you stated, the tension still exists even while freely scavenging.
Would love to hear Matt's thoughts on Alien Isolation. For me it's the most underrated game ever. I absolutely loved it. Damn shame it won't get a sequel.
@@alansmith4655 It's one of the most immersive games I've ever played and I don't use that term lightly it's an immersive sim it's up there with Ultima, System Shock, Thief, Deus Ex, you name it. It gets you to invest into a world and never stops pulling you in. 11/10
That entire concept is rain world
@@SE_Lin honestly, It's the total opposite for me. Look up Under The Mayo's alien isolation review if you want to know what I mean
@@Nightflyermike I've seen his review and his points are valid if you play on low difficulty and are really trying to scrutinize it. The AI isn't actually as good as people say it is, the movement is really limited, the puzzles are dumb, but so many of the other games I mentioned also suffer from those kinds of issues. Me saying it's an 11/10 though was kind of an exaggeration I'd probably give it 8. Just because some immersive sims have the same problems as Isolation doesn't mean all of them do, sure it could have been better but it's still really good.
I enjoy Mayo's Doom content but honestly a lot of times he covers other games I don't enjoy it I only liked his Into the Breach video. his opinions on Devil May Cry 5 are so annoying because he's kind of right right but he doesn't actually know why he's right the arguments and examples he gives are just avoidable cases of player error a lot of the time.
He hasn't played the game enough, DMC is like Eternal you need to really engage with it to play well at all let alone master it. He goes on about how important it is to master all the tools Eternal gives but in DMC it's like he doesn't put in a fraction of the effort to try and get it. Why not? It's a much deeper and more rewarding game than Eternal, less buggy too.
He doesn't have to be a god, he doesn't have to use 100% of every character moveset, but it would be easier to take his critiques seriously if he was using at least like 30-50% of the moveset of characters like Nero who are intentionally more streamlined, trying to use exceed & using moves like calibur and breaker moves like gerbera's jocky because these provide horizontal movement and can help you position the camera better.
It won't avoid the really bad mishaps and jank that can happen, the camera can spaz out from no fault of your own in DMC5 but so many who criticize it don't realize you are not meant to ignore camera controls in DMC games and in DMC5 the most because you are never not in control of the camera. Camera effects directional inputs of which there are many in DMC. You don't need constant adjustment unless you are doing specific techniques but it's a good habit to learn in DMC. It's like it's wanted for DMC5 camera to do all the work in framing the action for you when that's not really possible in a 3D action game without fixed camera. Mayo should understand this well as a God of War fan but I feel like he won't even enjoy the DMC games with fixed camera angles that much given his presumptuous and pretentious attitude towards DMC5. It's not a game you can play for 40 hours and then critique like you really know what you're talking about.
I wish I could agree on the theme of helping people being rewarding in this setting, but it's undermined by the execution of Joel's death. There's two big reasons why I think this is the case.
Firstly, Joel didn't fight the Fireflies out of selfish reasons: he did it to save Ellie. Disregarding whatever debate, he was valuing someone else's life and feelings that much more. Killing Abby's father was never something he wanted. If Naughty Dog wanted a story where helping people was more rewarding, Joel's fate would have had a more even hand to it than "You killed my dad, now I'll kill you". However you slice it, there's thematic dissonance.
Second, Abby tortures and murders Joel, and the only reason she pays ANY price for this is because she didn't go as far as to kill Tommy and Ellie, despite both being at her mercy. This sends the signal that, actually, Abby's problem is that she didn't go too far.
This goes even further when you see the finale, and realise the only reason Abby didn't starve to death on a cross is because she hurt Ellie so deeply that Ellie gave up everything in her life to track Abby down one more time, fight her, then have a change of heart just before drowning her. There are many other problems with Ellie sparing Abby, as you criticised, but this is one of them that cuts at the story's intended purpose all the deeper.
I don't know what the answer to this is without giving Joel a bigger part in the story, changing his fate, or delaying his death until later into the story. Which is why I feel TLOU2's narrative is compromised: its plot and core are at a mismatch.
Also? A missed opportunity as big as Ellie and Abby never talking is that Abby and Joel never talk. Even if it wouldn't change anything, there was so much for the two to discuss and it feels like they avoided that just to preserve the structure of their narrative. If nothing else, it'd make me believe that Abby actually feels guilty over killing Joel, which I feel should never have been left as a simple implication
@@commanderleo The fireflies didn't value her consent either, whether or not she would say yes is irrelevant...because they didn't fucking ask, and what if she did say no, hmm? do you think they would stop? No, of course they fucking wouldn't have. The fireflies were morally bankrupt and incompetent. Did Joel do something selfish? perhaps, but that would be simplifying the issue to the point of being disingenuous. Joel did what he did for both Ellie and himself, he didn't want her to have a meaningful death, he wanted her to have a meaningful life. The fireflies were terrorists who would have used the "cure" to gain leverage over FEDRA and other opposing factions. This cure wouldn't solve a thing, it would just be another resource to fight over. Humanity would be even more fucked.
Long story short. Joel did the right thing and the Fireflies got what they fucking deserved.
+CommanderLeo But Ellie didn't get to establish what her thoughts and intentions were regarding that whole situations because she wasn't given a chance as the fireflies drugged her up and planned to kill her anyway. Did the fireflies try to have a conversation with the two of them and see what they have to say? No. Would the fireflies have reveled to them the fact that they also killed plenty of other people while trying to obtain a cure and failed? No. Do you think Elli's thoughts and intentions might have been drastically different had she been aware of this? Probably. Also, this is one of the things that Joel could have mentioned during his conversations with Ellie, but instead the game tried to retconn Joel's decision as a "selfish" one despite the fact that he was in fact saving somebody's life and also tried to retconn the fireflies as "morally good" despite the first game portraying them as nothing more than glorified terrorists.
I also like the fact that there is so much emphasis put on Elli's consent, despite the fact that she's just a child. It seems like everybody conveniently forgets this as well as what the role of a parent is supposed to be.
31:50 - 33:00 I think I saw a bit of interview about that ending where a ND employee (possibly Neil Druckmann himself, or Halley Gross) said that they added the flashback/epiphany because playtesters didn't get why she was stopping before actually chocking her.
Regardless, I think it just doesn't work. As you say in that part of the video, the sunk cost is just too big at this point. Either she should have not gone from the farm at all, or she should have killed her for real, and then not get a night sleep for the rest of her life.
I think that this ending is really trying to have its cake and eat it too. Like, showing how whole-consuming revenge is, but at the same time, Ellie needs to forgive Joel and Abby, and herself and keep her humanity...after murdering LOTS of people.
I can see why it didnt work for people. but that's why it made the scene heart wrenching for me. I'm of the belief that if alot of people had an issue with a thing, that its still an issue even if I liked it, but the idea of Ellie, on the edge of getting what she wants, realizing it isn't what she needs.....man it just fucks me up dude.
My biggest problems with the game were the absurd over reliance on conveniently placed notes for world building and how the themes in the story are so radically different from the first game that it almost feels like a separate universe. Survival is a huge theme in the first game, Joel's decision at the end of the game has weight because we've seen that humanity as a whole has basically failed to stabilize outside of Jackson and the possibility of a cure is powerful because it represents hope for a change in the world order.
Quarantine zones are failing, there are more bandits then non bandits and children have to be desensitized to ultra violence if they are to have any chance of making it through puberty. Yet in the second game, the infected are suddenly an afterthought. Everywhere you look, civilization is not only surviving the apocalypse, it is THRIVING. The WLF's biggest concern are not the zombies, but deserters and cultists and they have no problem spending ammo at firing ranges or with sending 6 month pregnant women to the front lines. The Seraphites have an entire island to themselves that isn't contaminated by a single spore; in the first game that would be an unbelievable luxury akin to finding El Dorado.
And now the second game glosses over how Abby's group makes a round trip across multiple states, the same trip that nearly obliterated the fireflies according to Marlene. Not to mention how Jesse, Tommy and then later Ellie all make solo expeditions across the country and all of them magically make it to their destination without hassle.
If the plot didn't heavily bank on events from the first game you could almost tell the story with an entirely new cast of characters because of how disparate the themes and worlds in the first and second games are with each other.
Correct. The second game much such a big deal out of the fact that Joel might have potentially deprived humanity of not only a cure but of the only doctor that could have provided this cure (for whatever convoluted reason), but on the other hand we are shown the fact that the mushroom zombies aren't that big of a deal anymore, there are major human settlements throughout the states, people are able to freely move around for miles, spores are apparently only found in long abandoned buildings, etc. The writers seemed to have been more preoccupied with trying to tell cliche revenge and love triangle drama stories that they seemed to have forgotten the universe that the game was supposed to be set in, and how these themes might not exactly fit or make that much sense within it.
You are 100% spot on. Distance and terrain was always a major factor when travelling in The Last of Us Part 1, and it was baffling to me when there was a cutscene, the screen cuts to black and we have Ellie in a completely different location as it was just another episode of a cheap tv series.
Appreciate the care taken in making sure this game gets as fair a shake as possible.
The contrast between Matt being one of the few to seriously criticize the first game while also being one of the few to give a fair look at the second is so funny, considering that he was equally fair in evaulating both of them.
@@slenderMax28
"Few"
There have been a lot of critics on UA-cam who gave this game a fair look. Chances are, you probably just don't agree with most of them.
@@frogglen6350 Most "critics" on youtube are reactionary idiots who have surface level critiques that amount to "I don't like it, so it was clearly a failure". MM at the least is firm but fair, he doesn't get lost in the sea of pandering to idiots on youtube.
@@Tiger66261
Last of Us 2 is a failure though. *Niel abused his workers. Pointless disgusting Ma'am sex . Plot holes* You just sound mad that Ghost of Tsushima is the bigger success
Frog Glen when did they ever mention Ghost of Tsushima?
Honestly I don’t care at all if he hates it or loves it, I just want to hear more of matts beautifully written opinions.
simp
Epic Onion simp
Yeah, the "thoughts on" series was a nice touch by Matt in not letting us wait for too long on some games he would like to have a word on, instead of integrating them to his "Mega Microvideo" series.
Perhaps because that series already is going to be related to a general theme for all those compiled thoughts.
I also love his non biased highly critical reviews, alongside Nerrel and Dunkey they make the best review content IMO.
Real talk.
Simp
The bigger issue I had with the presentation of the combat encounters is any disconnect between narrative and gameplay is purely the fault of intentional developer decisions this time around. The first game had plenty of issues with poor AI and animations not always working as intended, but these are clearly things that the developers wouldn't have let happen if given more time/resources. Conversely in part 2, there's they didn't have to bring up the windows, you didn't have to see people drive up right below you. These are clearly decisions that the developers made that actively hamper the experience in an attempt to drum up cheap tension. ND definitely had better tools and more resources this time around but its been wasted on an experience that doesn't work best as a third person shooter video game. Feels at lot like bioshock infinite all over again.
Should have been entirely melee combat focused
Denzel Romero it is if you play it on Survivor
@Roman Buloichyk So by that last sentence, are you essentially saying that "positive" opinions are more valuable than "negative" ones? Why? If criticism is constructive and accurate (not simply inflammatory) what makes it better or worse than praise?
If anything, an accurate deconstruction of flaws should be incredibly valuable to every creator. There is no growth or improvement of craft without it.
There is certainly a place for praise and encouragement, when the work merits such. Otherwise, it is the burden of every creator in every craft that they must bear honest criticism of their work, if they wish to hone their skills. Iron sharpens iron, so to speak.
I disagree. For instance in the school scene the danger would not have felt nearly as present if you didn't see or hear them come in (would you have even known about them at all?). The majority of those instances serve story elements in at least some way. I would also argue that their time was better spent nailing the subtleties in animations or voices than refining those moments of ludonarrative dissonance; like Mathew said, he always acted like he was supposed to his first playthrough. Even if some of those moments still happened while you were playing the part, it's still technically you breaking your own immersion. I think this is simply some leftover pains from them using the wrong medium for the job. The Last of Us 2 would fit much better as a movie.
Mr. Matthewmatosis, my biggest dream is for you to make a Ninja Gaiden Black commentary just like you did for the first Devil May Cry. More people need to know how good that game is. Thank you
At the end, why doesn’t Ellie keep the guitar and just learn how to play slide?
Or re-string and play with her right hand? Totally doable :D
A guitar in a post apocalyptic world is pretty cumbersome if the implication is that she goes on a new path. It's also implied she or at least someone comes back to the house multiple times and used the guitar since it has more wear than the last time we've seen it.
Then you ruin Neil's idiotic depression simulator.
S4ns it’s like you didn’t even play the game
Or carve some replacement protective out of wood and play. It worked for Tony Iommi of Black Sabbath.
I know you said you don't want to bang on the ludonarrative dissonance drum too hard, but this is Naughty Dog we're talking about. Isn't the main example for ludonarrative dissonance supposed to be Uncharted? It just seems that Naughty Dog doesn't understand this concept and it applies to all of their games.
Even as far back as Jak 2 where killing civilian NPCs was extremely hard not to do 😂
Except you don't understand what Ludonarrative dissonance means. There's none of that in either the Uncharted or TLOU games.
Look up Sole Purpose's video on it; it's amazing break down of it. Ludonarrative dissonance has nothing to do if the player agrees with character's place/actions in the narrative, but whether the gameplay elements or story moments contradict the themes of the game. Violence and revenge being the foundation (also for the other themes) of the game means that it doesn't. There's no dissonance between the game and its themes.
blackmanwithcomputer the games gameplay elements do contradict with the ‘themes’ though... the theme wasn’t violence and revenge... it was that those things were bad, not what you should want, not a means to an end, etc. This is contradictory to the gameplay literally not giving you the choice to be purely pacifist at all
@@BWGmedia It is necessary tho, because most of the violence is in self-defense and people in this world view the violence as a necessary act. Violence/revenge being bad isn't the main theme to take away, moreso that violence/revenge is an easy out. Ellie has so many issues that she hasn't and doesn't want to deal with, and Abby comes along becomes a target for her to project on. Revenge is the red herring, while the graphic violence is just matter of fact. It's not there to make you feel good or bad about what you're doing, it's just realistic.
@@MrMannnMannn How is that dissonance in Uncharted 2? The game never set out to examine any of Nathan's actions, and his willingness to go out of his way to not kill people doing honest work shows that he's not a monster anyways. Everyone he killed was out of self-defense, so the amount is irrelevant. There's no dissonance between the game and its narrative.
For TLOU franchise, the violence is more realistic to ground the reality of the characters. This is what the violence here is, it's heavier than violence in Uncharted. It's also necessary to survive, regardless of morality.
It's also a red herring. The crux of the game is Ellie and Abby dealing with their emotional issues and them using those feelings to justify the violence as anything but that or that exacting violence on their enemies will make them feel better or, with the last fight, it's both cathartic and punishment at the same time.
I mean, even at the end of Kill Bill, the Bride does actually kill Bill.
Because Tarantino knows how to tell a story and leave the audience entertained. Not killing Bill after killing EVERYONE else would have been incredibly contrived.
Robocop, Django Unchained, True Grit, even when villains get revenge like Oldboy these were all well received movies. Revenge tropes exist for a reason because movies, books, shows, etc wouldn't be good without them.
Either they get revenge and ride off into the sunset, get revenge and get either put in jail or die in the end satisfied, or they get revenge and they feel cold proving that revenge is a fool's errand.
@@TallDude404 but Bill didn't spare Beatrix, he intended to kill her and thought he had, Abby didn't want to do shit to Ellie, just joel. She even let Ellie go and showed mercy, your comparison doesn't make sense if you trying to say Abby is Bill and Beatrix is Ellie.
Relax it’s a joke. Keep in mind Bill wasn’t even in the first film
@@brandon17760 Killing + Torturing your dad in front of you is not doing shit to Ellie? Sure, she spared her. Would you live the rest of your life thinking "she spared me"? Nobody would, revenge is the logical path, specially in a setting as violent as TLOU universe.
Reminder that metal gear rising, a game with a talking robot dog and a senator that kicks the player character like a football through a field goal while quoting MLK and Ronald Reagan, did a better job of making you think about the gameplay consequences of your character's actions than TLOU 2.
In what way did it do a better job than The Last of Us 2?
"Nanomachines, son"
overcome with guilt every time the game gives me an S rank for murdering six people without taking damage
@@mariezeephyllix7736 MEMORIES BROKEN
What? The whole Ripper mode transformation was to show how Raiden and the player enjoy all the killing and don't give a shit about the lives of some random cyborgs. Raiden's "justice" facade mirrors how the player might justify why they play games, but we really just want to hack 'n' slash.
As great as the facial/motion/whatever capture technology was, all the praise for it becomes moot for me because I think back to how amazing DMC V looked. Unlike TLoU 2, the graphics for DMC V were the icing, not the cake
I'd go as far to say DMC V will age better because the character designs are still super exaggerated so a sense of style is still present.
The RE engine also aims at "realism", I dont know how, but DMCV managed to used in its "fantastic" style.
I would say, TLOU2's faces are *technically* better, but artistically
I haven't ever seen a game trigger the uncanny valley discomfort in me before (not on purpose, like a horror game), which probably means, that those are cutting edge faces with a lot of small details, but not enough of those details to make for a perfect rendition
simp
@@justkiet amen brother.
You've probably got the best economy of words out of all the "videogame analysis" channels on UA-cam. It's almost uncanny.
Check out Tim Rogers (Action Button), he's possibly a thesaurus in human form. No denying Matt's talents of course, this was an excellent review
Matt and Tim and the best check out Tim Rogers
I can't wait until Joseph "the town is making him stupid" Anderson releases his sixteen hour analysis where he spends eight hours making unnecessary hamfisted metaphors and seven straight up lying about a core plot point or game mechanic.
@@remembertotakeshowerspleas355 So true. I think Joseph Anderson is really hit or miss.
@@remembertotakeshowerspleas355 lol I like Joe just fine but he is definitely much more opinionated and not concise at all. Different styles for different folk.
I was always going to be at odds with TLOU2, simply because for me Joel and Ellie's story was finished. My imagination could fill in the gaps of what happened after the ending and even then it didn't really matter. Going back and destroying my perceptions of these characters just feels a very phony and cheap way of making a sequel.
What they should have done is a new story in the same world, new characters, and new setting.
I love the idea of the same universe with a different story and new characters.
Eugene Mr. Krabs True. The world of TLOU, while beautiful, is always carried by it’s characters. The first game understood this. The zombie apocalypse setting was a backdrop for the characters, their drama and their journey, the second game regresses from that in my opinion.
@@SquidBloop lmfaooo 🤡🤡🤡
@@SAMSARALIVEEEEEE I actually think that The Last Of Us's world (ironically) really stands out from other post apocalyptic universes. It's one of the only ones I can think of where the American goverment hasn't collapsed, even after 20+ years.
I can't believe you threw the dog's ball over the fence, you monster.
We were the dog the entire time. And the ball was the hope of a satisfying story.
Over the fence. Never to be seen again.
In the second fetch sequence, I tried to get the squid toy stuck in the open cage hanging from the ceiling, but I think it has collision detection over the opening :(
Globalist Gamer tried the same thing, didn't work
Its not his fault, its clear that Abbynator has no control over her strenght.
As a "Mechanical Extrovert" myself, its not that I dislike slower moments or areas in which you just walk around & interact with stuff, its when gameplay & story clash, in what I am supposed to feeling. A scenario in which my character is in immediate life or death danger, with a slim chance of survival being based on them taking smart quick decisions clashes with my requirement being holding forward and going through a set of quick time events. If anything, they should be really demanding, for me, as a player.
In early Devil May Cry games, Dante was an invulnerable baddass in cutscenes but, during gameplay, you'd die in a few hits, if not careful. DMC3 opened with Dante getting 10+ scythes stabbed into him and he walks off, with a one-liner. This doesn't ruin the immersion or stakes, for me, because DMC is more of an action game with a simple narrative. DMC has an extremely underrated narrative but it is never betrayed by these moments of Dante enabling God mode, for a cutscene. It's forgivable because it doesn't impact the main events of the story and also because they are stylish beyond words.
The Last of Us Part 2 is going for a more complex story, which should harbour more towards realism & therefore should get more scrutiny for its short comings. Part 1 had that forever immersion breaking problem of Ellie sprinting in front of enemies, and going unnoticed. Part 2 has characters making stupid decisions like leaving windows open, leave maps for their hideouts, etc, all of which break immersion. The same can be said for set pieces in which little is demanded of the player, despite the clear threat & danger for the characters.
Bottom line is that gameplay & story should go hand in hand. It feels wrong when they break away from each other and there should be a high standard of organic gameplay for this game, being how well received the first one was. It should draw the player in and make the world feel real & alive. Dark Souls has a strong attention to detail and its probably part of the reason why those games are so well loved. They reward engagement, whereas this game seems to be hit 'n' miss, about it.
26:20 I'm glad I'm not the only one who had this initial reaction
This will sound silly but that part of the game reminded me of the Sonic/Shadow boss fights in Sonic Adventure 2 ("The Last of Us part II is like Sonic Adventure 2" is a comparison I never thought I'd make). I wonder what TLOU II would've been like if they split the game into two separate focused campaigns, like having the player choose "Ellie's story" or "Abby's story".
SA2's story structure would've been pretty useful for TLOU2. You'd still have to play Ellie and Abby's stories in order to unlock the epilogue but at least you'd have a choice.
I feel like that only really works if the characters come together at the end, otherwise instead of hero/dark/final you get Ellie/Abbie/some more Ellie
Ellie and Abbie use the power of the seven Cordyceps Emeralds to defeat the BioFungus.
@@alexlee4154 Well said and interesting input. It just comes off as one sided.
My problem with the way joel dies is that Abby tortures him beats him to a pulp instead of just shooting him which made it even harder for me to sympathize with her. Mire over she never shows any remorse for the people he kills and even revels in the thought of murdering the pregnant Dina while Ellie multiple times regrets and feels remorse (despite killing hundreds on the way)
@@jeremyorr1234 Ellie at least showed remorse about killing a pregnant woman while Abby was happy that about Dina being pregnant. Abby only let Dina live because of Lev. Abby never shows remorse about the people she kills, Ellie does. The way Abby tortured Joel instead of just executing him after he saved her life and how contrived the whole thing was (open doors, no guards, army of zombies instantly vanishes, ellie calling for tommy and joel in an abnormal situation) sapped all the sympathy I might have felt for her from the beginning. Had they shown me more of abbey from the beginning and more about her life with her father or her journey to jackson I might have liked her more but they had to start with this nothing character shooting joel in the knee before even confirming he is the right joel and then beating the shit out of him and when a girl who obviously cares a lot about him is crying on the floor she still caves his head in. Yeah no sympathy from me.
And yeah Ellie acts like a dumbass, travelling across a continent to kill abbey, killing hundreds of people on the way but suddenly stopping the moment she is about to kill her. Fucking retarded. The story was a complete mess.
A major point of the game is how the characters are changing by the end. Yes Abby was ruthless but the entire journey playing as her is about her redemption arc. she wasn’t demonic or reveling in killing people (like the rattlers), she just had a very strong, tribal sense of justice. She wasn’t excited to kill Dina, she was ready to take vengeance for her friend Mel. WE see Ellie’s remorse, Abby doesn’t. By the end you realize they were both on the same journey of redemption just at different stages
well its kinda weird then that you feel any sympathy for Joel, considering In the first game he also tortured people and was incredibly cruel.
@@TooFatTooFurious but in the first game it was all about him regaining his humanity through ellie and there he had a job to do, while also being in a survival situation.
@@LukasJampen and Abby had a job to do too. She also was in a survival situation. And over the course of the game she also becomes a better person. So it works out.
Agreed that "REVENGE BAD" loses so much meaning when you already killed over 100 people to get to the revenge kill. Elle had no problem killing nameless people or people who's names she learned moments before killing them. Why in the hell would she stop killing the one person she was after. Elle doesn't know what the player learned. To her Abby is just Joel's killer.
Ellie didn't kill those "100 people" out of revenge, she did it out of necessity or self defense. Even Mathewmatosis says as much.
@@Tiger66261 yh he did say it at some point in the video. But then he forgot about it.
Ellie knows she killed all her friends.
She knows that they let her live and she wasted it.
Ellie stopping at the 101 person is good for her. She gains nothing by killing Aby. She makes the right choice.
Why would you say "what is one more?". She gains nothing by killing that "one more"
@@Tiger66261 KIlling abbies crew was certainly part of the revenge plot. And most of the people she killed was in service or as a result of the revenge. "I caused those deaths with my actions and my hands, but it really wasnt my goal" is a pretty shallow excuse.
18:31 I'm glad somebody called out that Ellie takes off her silencer when confronting Nora.
Doesnt matter cause she was gonna torture her for information anyways
@@MM-hi Right? Like what does a silencer matter if Nora is screaming? Dumb criticism.
This is pretty easy to explain but if this is really the only thing to latch onto then it’s an immaculate review
@@wonderguardstalker There other problems with the review. Such as him complaining that Joel didn't stop Ellie from going to the hospital, when Joel literally says she left in the middle of the night. Or complaining about Ellie not killing Abby when Ellie's killed others, when it's pretty obvious Ellie regrets all that killing, and it'd be fucked up to leave Lev to die.
Muhfucka Jones Kinda wish the game had focused more on Ellie’s thoughts emotions etc going into that “reveal” and seeing more of how it happened. And also wish the game didn’t make it into a melodramatic “revelation” when the first game’s ending implied Ellie didn’t believe Joel but chose to believe him for everybody’s sake. And why the fuck should Ellie care about Lev. At this point and as far as she knows, that kid is dead.
"There is a nice message here that helping people leads to happiness in a way that revenge doesn't" 34:46
Tell that to Joel. ;)
Joel didn't help anyone other than himself by "saving" Ellie from the surgery. It was a selfish act. Ellie would have wanted to give her life for a vaccine and Joel knew that and robbed her of that choice and then attempted to covered up the truth by lying to her face more than once.
@@sillyslapper92 Ellie was never given a choice, so there's no way of saying with certainty that she would have sacrificed herself. On top of that, she was a child. Children (and teenagers) usually aren't capable of understanding the true gravity of a decision like that. It takes someone with real wisdom and maturity to comprehend what's actually being asked of you in a life/death situation. It wouldn't have been appropriate or even *fair* to ask Ellie to die at that point. Especially after considering there wasn't even a guarantee of a cure.
@@sillyslapper92 Joel saved Abby's life and got an Iron driver to the skull
@@malakarvonstroheim5372 The catalyst of Joel's death was him murdering Abby's father and the Fireflies
@@sillyslapper92 So? Someone saving your life from ending in some of the most brutal fashion is plenty of reason to find simpathy, it's almost like she expects people to help her for some god forsaken reason, shrugging off the fact that he saved her life only detracts from her character
An issue I had with the gameplay difficulty in TLOU was the absurd lack of resources when it made sense to have them. You could kill several armed enemies and, despite them shooting an endless amount, you would almost never receive ammo from them. The game was clearly not designed for higher difficulties as, towards the end of the game, it became effectively unavoidable to fight enemies yet you never had enough ammo to kill them off. The enemies were placed where they had to be killed but you'd have 3 bullets despite stealthy and skipping combat in many areas.
That's an understandable compromise they had to make cause the game has a post apocalyptic setting and survival is obviously a huge theme. If you could go with all guns blazing at all times like this was Uncharted then the combat segments would lose all tension.
Grounded is the way to play there’s plenty of ammo if u search everywhere and play smart
@@sumstuff6956 Grounded on tlou 1 is all these issues x100
@@vivalakakarot So by successfully using stealth the game becomes harder
@@sumstuff6956I played and finished grounded. Not realistic when you have to have one clip of ammo in order to get more pick ups. At that point it’s just a meta gameplay on using your resources rather than salvage them for those boss battles that could make it hard on that mode.
I really dont like the scene where Ellie confronts Joel. Joel doesnt explain himself properly, he doesnt explain all the context behind his decision. Its a frustrating scene to watch
THIS !!! I’m so tired of media in general just refusing to let characters explain themselves for the sake of drama
Imagine if Guts finally has Griffith beaten and is about to finish him... And then just lets him go.
People would be pissed but I doubt that Berserk would ever go that route as a typical ending of guys vs griffth shonen kind of ending.
This is Senien, the quality of writing is gonna be much higher.
The villain doesn’t need to be killed for a satisfying ending to a revenge story, what matters is consequences. As long as Griffith faces consequences that match his actions, he doesn’t need to be killed by the hero for the ending to be satisfying. Consequences come in all shapes and sizes, and there’s different and sometimes worse punishments than death. Abbie suffered plenty by the end of the game, her friends died, and she was imprisoned for months and crucified, so I’d argue her death was unnecessary. She already faced enough consequences that befitted her actions. Ellie killing her wouldn’t justice, it’d just be sadistic. Letting the antagonist go isn’t unheard of, Luke doesn’t kill Darth Vader, for example. There’s also the key difference between Griffith and Abby that Abby is redeemable, has suffered tons after her bad actions, takes steps to do so, and hasn’t done anything near as bad as Griffith. Griffith is someone who’s done much worse, irredeemable, hasn’t suffered much AFTER his worst actions like the eclipse, and has no plans on stopping. That’s why killing Griffith is justified, though not the only possible form of punishment, while killing Abbie is redundant and not fitting
You should keep in mind that Griffith is also in the body of Guts and Casca Children, so there is a more higher cause than an empty revenge.
Here's how you can make the dog killing part have more of an impact on the player.
Step 1 [the most important step]: Make killing the dog optional.
Step 2: Have the dog guarding supplies the player does not necessarily need, but likely wants. Maybe the supplies could go towards upgrading a gun earlier then you normally would be able to.
Step 3: The only way to obtain these supplies is by killing the dog.
There, now the game can play the "You killed that dog, don't you feel bad?" card on players who do end up killing the dog. This should have the opposite effect of "I sure am glad I didn't kill that dog before" on players who did not kill the dog.
Brilliant idea on improving the gameplay mechanics and the immersion - 2 of the rather weak spots of the game.
This would have been so much more impactful, especially if they were able to show Abby finding Alice in the exact position she died in as a result of in-game actions (and maybe leave a few bloodstained footprints that match the path they took away from the cache as Ellie). I don't think there is one single way in which player actions in one story can influence the other, even though the game's structure and themes are crying out for this.
Undertale found a way to make you feel bad about killing your friends after the going the pacifist route because you either
1. A completionist
or
2. An asshole
I guess that would have been a good inclusion, but I didn't mind the way it was presented in the game. I'm sure ND was fully aware that players would feel bad when they had to kill dogs, even if they don't have a choice in that matter. It only plays out to show how gritty and unforgiving this world really is though. I don't mind the lack of decisions presented to me since this is a linear game telling a linear story. I don't have to agree with what the characters do, only thing is I have to believe that said character WOULD do it. Like Joel going on a killing spree in that hospital in the first game, Abby being so filled with anger that she pursues revenge on Joel and Ellie doing the same on Abby. Even though Matthew nrought a good point that Ellie might as well have just killed Abby, but I do believe that her decision in the end was still in character as she sees Abby being to Lev what Joel was to herself. I don't need to reflect a character I play and the decisions they make onto myself to enjoy a story in an interactive medium. I get a story and some challenging gameplay along the way (well, depending on the difficulty I choose).
The war of mine did the same, you can rob old people home to get alot of resource. they will beg but do nothing to you. I feel shit the first time I did that
30:02 That image of Abby biting Ellie and Ellie's face when she's recoiling from it will never not make me laugh.
I hated the Abby vs. Ellie boss fight, as it made Ellie just another AI. You can even stand in light and cast a shadow on the wall in front of Ellie, and she doesn't react at all. Such a disappointment.
I died quite a few times in one of phases of this fight. To the point that it completely shattered any emotional connection I might have had to the climax of the story. It's pretty bad when I literally didn't care who killed who, I just wanted it to end.
@@peckc16 The first time I struck Ellie there must have been some sort of bug because as soon as I pressed square to get another punch in, Ellie immediately turned around and killed Abby, so I thought you had to just get one punch in and run away over and over again. Got surprisingly far doing that but you can imagine how much it made me hate it even more.
@@AwesomeNick94 same happened to me more or less! I stealthed up behind her twice and punched, but she reacted and broke my combo for some reason( I continued to hit square). This convinced me you had to do something first before stealth punching her- like use her own traps against her or use part of the environment to distract her first . Nope. Just run up and stealth punch her. Worked for some reason much later on. I legit just wanted the game to put a chicken hat on me and prompt me to skip the fight if it's too hard 😂
Well I really liked this review,as was purely just about the game and nothing around it.
This type of review is pretty hard to find in UA-cam about this game.
I think you did a pretty fair job here.
I have no interest in playing this game but watching Ellie throw snowballs in a game that would primarily be a third person stealth shooter immediately made me think of what you said about Bioshock Infinite way back when
Its a "Sneak up on your wife to give her a kiss"
@@etchyasketch2851 Bet they just played Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and just really liked the snowball fight it opens with
@@Kriss_ch. I love that snowball fight!
@@etchyasketch2851 Where is that from and are you saying that's a bad thing?
26:35 this so much. Everyone kept complaining that they felt bad attacking Ellie and didn't want to kill her, and while I agree, this part that you mentioned stood out to me as so much worse in that section. The fact that killing Abby was Ellie's whole goal really shows how forced a lot of the writing is when you're literally not ALLOWED to kill Abby, and Ellie killing Abby is a game over... For someone so willing to take risks and be "bold" in their writing, they absolutely should have let that be a possible ending. However they didn't because they REFUSED TO TAKE THE RISK of letting people do that if that's the ending they want. They were scared that basically everyone would choose that ending, because they knew their writing wasn't good enough to actually make people root for Abby if they weren't forced to. They knew nobody would have continued on to their ham-fisted extra segment of the game at the end if they let you kill Abby and end it there with Ellie at the house with Dina.
It's because Ellie's revenge quest is a red herring.
The ending where Abby survives would be called the ”bad ending” and oh boy Neil didn’t want that, what a douchebag.
honestly, they could have it be that, if Ellie killed Abby during that boss fight, a short 1-2 minutes montage/finale plays, then fake credits, then a "would you like to try that boss fight again?" prompt
I disagree that there was some conspiracy to force players to experience a story a certain way, because I think Naughty Dog were banking on the player being invested in the story they were telling, probably with the belief that the players would be attached to Abby at this point in the story. As stated in the video, the game going out of its way to appeal Abby to the player probably resulted in her being viewed less sympathetically, and thats more of a fault with the medium the story was being told through.
I liked TLoU 2, but I thought it was far from the lightning in a bottle that was the first game. Frankly I think presentation is the best aspect of every single Naughty Dog game since Uncharted 1, with the sole exception of TLoU 1, which had good characters too.
@@cameronjohnson918 Blah blah word salad. The game absolutely forces you to play that way and denies you the choice, period. Doesn't matter how you look at it.
The game at times came off as characters doing things in service of the plot rather than the characters driving the plot like the first game. There is a ton of plot convenience, there are alot of uninteresting shallow characters, theres alot of stuff that has nothing to do with the main plot, characters die in shocking and brutal ways constantly, flashbacks within flashbacks. Its just alot and it feels unfocused. It's like they were so excited to tell this story that they didn't think about whether this was a good way to tell the story or even if this was a good story to tell with this world.
Haven't you heard? Very pregnant doctors often go on combat missions, only later to hide their giant baby bellies when the plot needs them to die!
Agreed on this, I think its a marvelous story told in another world, with anyother beginning. Neil has wanted to finish this story for so long, and now that he had the chance to finish it, he continued it from a story that never should have gone in this direction. Thats where most of the hamfisted and contrived aspects of the story come from. Everythings in service of the narrative regardless of the past, and it absolutely can be felt. It's sad, this game would have been a masterpiece and wonderfully received if it was simply a stand alone.
@@lockekappa500 Exactly. This story did not need Joel and Ellie for it to be told. This could be a completely new IP with different characters, and you could write essentially the same story.
@@hustheposum Ontop of that, it leaning on the successes of the first one I think created some lazy storytelling on their end. They already had investment in Joel, characters to put through this mess without setting them up in a better manner. It's almost ashame cause I think if they just finished TLOU and then did this game on its own, I think everything would have felt more earned.
@@Narniak69 they weren't going on a combat mission. Regardless she should've stayed at the stadium
Abby was able to kill Joel because Joel and Tommy just happened to let their guard down to a large group of armed strangers that hardened survivalists like the two of them would be extremely cautious around.
Abby was able to reach Joel because Joel just happened to be on patrol outside of his heavily secured compound on the same day Abby and her crew arrive in Jackson.
Abby was able to find Joel all by herself in a blizzard because a huge horde of zombies just happened to push her towards the very building Joel and Tommy were held up in.
Contrivance, thy name is The Last of Us Part II
And even after saving her dumb ass no questions asked, making them even, the bitch still tortures and kills him. What a great and likable protagonist.
Didn’t Abby follow tommy and Joel’s footprints? I thought that’s how she found them
@@MrBeesknees95 But wouldn't it be ever so convenient that the footprints were Joel and Tommy's? Add to that the random horde of zombies that appears and disappears when plot needs to happen
You're first point is good but you're second point is garbage. So many things happen because of coincidences.
the team originally intended for Abby to integrate herself into Jackson and then kill Joel a few weeks / months into her stay there. this would’ve done away with the plot convenience, but I’m assuming they dropped it because it would’ve made Abby impossible to empathize with, which says a lot about the writers priorities.
This is an extremely well-reasoned and even-handed criticism. You've done it again, Matt. Never stop.
"It's ok Lord shimura, I forgive khotun khan"
Hey hey now, let's not make references to actual video games in a review of the dumpster fire that is TLOU2.
@@Narniak69 had to be done brah
Not the main questline, but Jin did get that Sensei archer to forgive his apprentice for joining the mongols and murdering countless civilians though.
"I suddenly felt bad about wanting to kill Nicole Horne who murdered my family so I turned myself in to the police immediately after killing hundreds of her private goons."
Ghost of Tsuhima did the tail of revenge costing you everything much better. Jin did what he thought was right, but took no joy in becoming what he hated. "The road to hell is paved on good intentions"
The morality part works a lot better in a game like Dishonored, where it is based on how many people you have killed. The odd one, yeah that's understandable, tons of them, while that is just evil.
I agree
Way too much murder in this
Where as joel killed when confronted
Dishonored is a textbook case of how *not* to do it. The game is constantly throwing all these neat abilities at you and ways to kill enemies, but then punishes you if you use them instead of just 100% stealth everything. And then the double standard of, "It's okay to kill people, so long as the player character didn't do it directly.".
Already 5 minutes in and I really like how everything is edited down to be as concise as possible, no section on this vid feels stretched out. Longer doesn't always mean better!
As long as it needs to be, personally love his commentary on Dark Souls and Devil May Cry.
Is it just a regular thing on UA-cam for commenters to relentlessly kiss the ass of the UA-camr before even watching 1/4 of the video?
@@qumxlinger1081 Only ones that consistently produce well-written content. My original comment still stands after finishing the vid. Compare this to a video by NeverKnowsBest or Joseph Anderson and how this video does an excellent job of holding my attention, not just acting as background noise.
Longer doesn't always mean bad
Big Bernard I don’t know who those are but if they’re “European arm chair critic that talks about videe gamies (monotone voice is optional) for extended periods of time” #34635 I don’t think I’ll bother
15:24 I agree though for me it varies a lot depending on the game. I played through MGS2 this summer and I feel the cutscenes proved me the "recuperation" after expending a lot of energy during the gameplay segments. I also played someone MGSV during lockdown and the feeling was completely inverted; the gameplay was enjoyable but the almost stop and start nature of travelling to and fro the base sapped me of my energy and will to play the game (my will be limited enough with that game but that's another matter).
*Though this might be because the parts of each game where control is wrested from you vastly differ in quality.
Strong cutscenes absolutely can elevate a gameplay experience even if on paper they they should do the opposite. There is definitely an art of well directed cutscenes being able to serve as great rewards after long stretches of gameplay. Xenoblade 1 does this really well where there was times where I would find myself foolishly rushing through gameplay just to see the next cutscene resulting in me being underleveled for the finale.
I think for most people it mostly comes down to the quality of each section. If the gameplay is good, then it energizes you and if the story is good it energizes you. Combine this with pacing the different sections and Matthew's theory, and you likely have something approaching the actual situation.
In MGS2 the cutscenes give context to the immediate gameplay
In MGSV the cutscenes and base building are often unrelated to the current situation. Many of the mother base cutscenes could change the order and point in time they're shown
mgs5 has the worst story in the series but it also has plenty of positive as well like art direction, graphics, some level of humor, and easily the best stealth action gameplay.
It’s narrative is massively flawed but damn I still love playing it.
LudicrousKid MGSV didn’t bug me that much for kinda failing in the narrative department because MGS1-4 was pretty much all anyone ever needed.
Wow. The mechanical extrovert analogy is one of the best descriptions of the way I enjoy games I've ever heard. It's a large part of the reason I have zero interest in playing either Last of Us. But can spend a whole day ramming myself against Slay the Spire and only winning a couple times
We never got the recipe for bigot sandwiches?
0/10
One line of improvised dialogue
It's just a BMT in white bread.
Madman, never thought he'd actually do it
Why not?
Partially because he rarely delivers reviews of the massive pop games of the moment that people want him to cover (see MGSV or Odyssey)
But mostly because this game has become the latest battlefield of the so called "culture wars" and Matthew deliberately avoids making any political statements or taking sides, so it seemed unlikely to me he would bother with this one.
Draven A. I get the distinct impression that he couldn’t care less about that sort of thing and that he would not avoid discussing a game because of the nature of the conversation surrounding it.
How would Joel prevent Ellie from moving toward Saint Mary's Hospital? She slipped out in the middle of the night.
Dives
Ya, overall I thought all his points made sense, but I was also a little confused about what exactly that one meant. Feel like I must be missing something.
There are some points that i didnt agree with his review, for the greatest thing about this game is that i can defend the game to a lot of the criticism with logic, evidence or using just a little bit of interpretation,
@@maoaadriao There's also some obvious cherry picking specifically with TLoU2. The fact that you're not an active participant in the story and don't have agency in the choices isn't an issue for 99% of games (or at the very least is never brought up), but in this one it is?
I also feel like he misunderstood the ending's implications and the point about killing hundreds versus sparing Abby is moot when the game contextualizes these encounters as self defense (WLF and Seraphites kill outsiders almost without exception) whereas Abby is at her lowest and didn't want to fight. Abby had also personally spared Ellie twice even after all Ellie had done to her. Those NPC's that you kill throughout the game haven't shown any mercy to Ellie regardless of any hypothetical backstory they might have.
@@Ayoul Oh yeah, the cherry picking is insane, right now i'm playing ghost of tsushima and some of the things i see in main story missions, if i used the same logic people are using for TLOU2, i'd go insane just some of the "potential" flaws the story might have but i so far i never saw someone complain about the story of that game, the worst thing i have heard people say about that games story, is that it's decent.
@Christopher Marlowe He's not saying it makes it good, he says TLOU2 is being held to a MUCH higher standard than most games and being criticized because of it. Whereas 99% of games are making the same narrative mistakes without being put under the same microscope.
I'm awaiting naughty dogs next game, a WW2 epic where u play the 2nd half as Hitler
Hitler had feelings too!
I find the compleze abscence of games where you play as a nazi interesting. (Save for that one cod dlc)
A game wkuld be rsther perfect for conveying the exact circumstances of the rise of such an ideology, and the nigh impossible task of retaining ones decency when pressed into service under it.
that actually be pretty cool seeing the perspective as a german soilder in ww2
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 The main time I've seen where you play from the perspective of the Nazis (or at least soldiers of the Wehrmacht following orders of Nazi rulership) is in a couple of strategy games, for example the original company heroes with its two expansions gave you a total of 3 campaigns (well, two of them were basically mini-campaigns due to the nature of the second expansion). Now, I wouldn't say the perfectly explore the perspective in the way that you'd hope for, both of the mini campaigns are too short and too focused on specific wartime characters to really explore, but the campaign from the first expansion which places you into the perspective of Wehrmacht fighting against operation market garden explores some of the complexities and motivation of soldiers in the Wehrmacht especially under the circumstances where the end of the war seemed inevitably end in their defeat.
Still, I'd be really interested a more micro and close up experience. Company of Heroes probably felt a bit more confidant and safe trying something like this due to it still having its perspective on a macro level with some implicit distance and looking at a theater that was comparatively less brutal to let's say the eastern theater. Being put into the perspective of a German soldier on the eastern front would have great potential for exploration of both the nature of following orders and the natural dehumanizing way both war and Nazi ideology worked. But honestly I doubt that game would get the budget or the support it needs since it probably would scare off any major publisher and be looked at with such critical eyes that even a small flub in the presentation could get it crucified by a large group of people.
@@100aegir Strategy games tend to have campaigns for all sides, that is correct, but I imagine the more detached perspective helps with that.
I get a bitter sweet feeling from the flashback sequences where you have to act out a happy scene knowing the tragic fate of the characters. I think they show the player that it's important to appreciate the happy memories for what they are, even with the benefit of hindsight.
"I've only been in the apocalypse for a few months" Holy shit I'm dead
Toe that line like a good little sheep, just like Matt.
If they had worn masks when it all started, none of this would have happened. Who needs vaccines when a simple piece of cloth can save lives?
Abby's revenge plan just invites people to come kill her, because she deliberately made it personal by killing joel and letting Ellie live. What else did she expect to happen?
The Ellie fight is how I envisioned the end of MGSV before it was out. Fighting Solid Snake as Big Boss. But obviously, that isn't how it went...
That would’ve been the perfect end for the series and was the very reason I was so excited for that game in the first place. Oh well, still a fun game I guess.
@@SaberRexZealot my exact take on it too... *sigh
MGSV to me is like MGS2. Kojima tricked everyone into expecting one thing and he gave us the opposite. And I respect that
The issue can be seen that in general is that TLU2 is an ode to the limitations of Naughty Dog in regards to game design, a wasted effort so to speak, both in the first game and in the second one. The first one avoids those issues by working from a bottom up perspective, using the characters as an engine for development, which is easier since it allows for building more organic stories and worlds even though said worlds can and will suffer from glaring holes and issues. TLU2 goes instead for a top-down perspective, it takes a thematic, a motiff and tries to build around it the characters, the world and the story but that takes effort and skill which seldom can be found, it is a titanic task which often fails in its intent and delivers contradictory characters and worlds which are forced to stay under the pupper master's theme. In both games and approaches what I see is a typical movie structure, the games and Naughty Dog in general in its productions never took advantage truly of the medium but instead it feels like they took a game and decided to put a movie into it, instead of the various systems which are present in a non-hierarchical manner in a "ideal" game, by which I mean the gameplay, world, characters, music, story etc., you have your typical well structured movie and this sentiment feels the more jarring in TLU2 because it tries to offer "more" gameplay and when that moment is suddenly smashed by scripts it feels that there is a disconnection in this hierarchical structure. Movies works because the experience is tightly controlled from start to finish and lets both the prelude and after as moments where the viewer is free to make his own decisions, games work differently if they are to be truly games and not just interactive films.
@dayzgone This game failed on nearly every level as a video game and was a wasted effort.
@@Edax_Royeaux I wouldnt say that, but I will say its foundation was weak from the beginning, and it makes all the other pieces feel lackluster. You have story that feels disconnected because of bad pacing and gameplay, and gameplay that doesnt service the story in the manner it should sometime.
@@lockekappa500 I mean, even the music is a joke. You get to the scene where you see all the dead weed and it plays this tragic music and I burst out laughing. You could almost tell Neil Druckmann was like "Teens like weed right?" At nearly all points of the Last of Us 2, there's no immersion because the writing is so blunt.
@@Edax_Royeaux I dont see how you're connecting any of your points. Why did sad music make you burst out laughing? How does that relate to Neil druckmann thinking teens like weed. The sad music you hear is Dina and Ellie's theme "It Can't Last" which plays throughout the game.
I get you dont like the game, but I honestly think you're a little confused as to why you dont.
@@lockekappa500 It's because it's juvenile writing. They walk into a room with dead weed. Druckmann think is obviously thinking "Teens like weed" so he'll have sad tragedy music playing and it's so out of touch. A classic case of an adult trying to write about teens and ending up looking clueless. Of all the times to play tragedy music, they do it for dead weed and it breaks immersion because it's so obvious. I don't care about dead weed, the character don't care about the dead weed, but for some reason Neil Druckmann thinks we do so that's how he setups up the music. It's so bad it's funny.
Just because your confused doesn't mean I'm confused. That's not how that works.
One of the things i like about the ending is that, 2 people robbed Ellie of making the most important decisions of her life, sacrificing herself, forgiving Joel and to choose if she wanted to kill or forgive Abby(which she was probably thinking over the course of the game, although we only find that out at the end) i also think a part of why she left the Dina and JJ was because of that, she felt powerless to the will of other people and she finally wanted to make a decision for herself, she wanted to be selfish, like others were to her.
Btw, am i the only one that likes Owen, i just felt bad for the guy, Joel completely fucked up his life and now he just tries to live in his own little bubble( the aquarium), he is literally sheltering himself from the real world, he clearly hates his life and doesnt know what to do, thats why he wants to find the fireflies, to find some hope that he used to have.
Yeah, Owen was the best WLF member besides Abby IMO. I actually really cared about him, and wished that Abby hadn’t pushed him away on her quest for revenge
@@iMasterchris Yeah, sadly Abby was just thinking about herself, he got unlucky with the cards life gave him.
14:24 I died during that seraphite chase on Survivor+ even with an upgraded health bar. Do you just not take damage if you don't press buttons? Or is it random? Some of the set pieces are weird like that.
I think it’s very hard to die in this segment. I played on Survivor first and even though I took some damage, I was at full health after the chase.
@@bludtinge I was at half health after that, and used 9 of my 18 bullets. So Im not sure if its scripted or what.
LockeKappa that’s weird, you have unlimited ammo during the chase
@@bludtinge yeah Im pretty sure its because you get to cap out your ammo before that fight, and then again after you get to the FOB. I got hit ALOT tho, as I was on survivor and had less than half health
This has got to be the best review you've done, maybe the best game review online. Every sentence is so perfectly crafted and each point is backed up so well. Congrats sir!
I've been watching your videos almost since the beginning, and I honestly think this may be your best one yet. It's extremely well thought-out and really made me question a lot about video games as a medium. Kudos, and thanks for all your work over the years.
The cardinal sin from a writing POV this game makes is not having character synergy that can compete with Joel and Ellie's in TLOU1. It tries: Abby and Owen: Abby and Lev: Ellie and Dina. But none of them are as powerful or have as strong a journey, and that's by design. As a result, from a pragmatic view, I can't justify killing Joel off so early on, since we missed out what made TLOU1 so endearing to many people.
17:44, nice to finally hear someone say this. I definitely have issues with Part 2, but I’ve never understood why some people say the game disrespected Joel. And I’m very thankful he didn’t die in a “pandering blaze of glory”, as you worded it.
Personally I didn't mind that Joel died it was more the circumstances. There are scenes in the first game that make it seem silly. Joel sees through a whole ambush in the road in like seconds, but here he stands in the middle of a circle of armed strangers while Tommy gives them the coordinates to their base and their identities. He didn't have to go Rambo, but we have seen what he is capable of in the first game and I feel like the whole scene could have been better with a few characters moved over and a few lines different.
@@dropthexd3277 There is dialogue in Jackson that states they find and take in survivors. That's how the township has grown. Joel has been settled for several years by that point, evidently more relaxed, and expecting that any people they find are seeking shelter.
@@JeremyComans Doesn't Jesse say that Joel is a hard ass about everyone doing their patrols properly? Doesn't that go exactly against that?
Honestly, only experiencing both games recently, it just seems like killing Joel that early just doesn't really replace it with anything of equal value. Ellie seems weirdly calm and collected at the start of the adventure and Dina just really isn't engaging. The heart of the first game is Joel and Elly's relationship, there is nothing in the second game that really seems to carry or replace the heart they kill right at the start of the game by killing Joel and leaving Elly alone. I just feel like the game should actually give you that joel and elly relationship so you feel more when it's lost.
@@JeremyComans I understand that they bring in good people to grow their town, but I'm supposed to believe Joel hasn't dealt with any bad guys in those years? There are factions of cannibals and slavers and they still go out of the walls to do patrols.
@@geminia999 I got the impression they were worried about infected, especially if hordes were around. Not so much live folk.
Being a long time viewer and not a native English speaker, it stroke me since the first line that Matt’s review just started as a very personal experience. It starts as a cozy dialogue which is told somewhere nearby a warm fireplace or a bonfire somewhere in the forest. That’s what always kept me here on this channel - Matthew’s personal take on every project he covers. Whether he takes it all as rational as possible, you can’t deny the effort and love he puts in every single video he does. I haven’t watched even 30 seconds of this vid and I don’t know what he is about to say about the game, but I still wanted to mention it. Keep doing what you are doing, Matthew. Your work is highly appreciated. Best of luck from Russia. 👍🏼
Mathew has a wonderful way of dissecting a game and highlighting all that is good and bad. I love his insight. In a league of his own.
Now this will be interesting to hear in full...
18:10 Mel clearly took the normal road they talk about (Ellie and Jessie see it in Day 3 aswell). Abby has to go the long way because Issac won't let her.
Also I'm not sure how Joel is supposed to somehow prevent Ellie from reaching salt lake. He's not exactly gonna lock her up is he.
Yeah Joel mentioned that she ran off in the middle of the night
Yeah, that “cinema sins” part of the review was my least favorite
Probably ensure her that there is no cure and she dosen't need to search for any more answers. Like how you trust someone normally.
Was disappointed so much of this review was focused on the narrative rather than gameplay. Matosis is great, but I dont think he has much to say on stories. Given the CinemaSins analysis here while at the same time treating Kojima like he is at all a talented writer. Talk about dissonance.
@@Tamacat388 wtf are you writing about?
I think this is one of your best videos. I really liked the comparisons that you make between movies and game stories. I can’t imagine how much time it takes to write the script for a video like this, but you are really great at saying a lot with few words.
The two things I hate in this game:
One, having incompetent companions dont make sense. Two, the Bald Seraphite that shrugs off headshots is out of place.
In the first game having to balance Ellie's AI in a way that she isnt too overpowering was a good excuse because of where she was in the story, she's an inexperienced kid learning from Joel along the way, it makes sense for her to often mess up or be hesitant in combat.
In TLOU2, Dina and Jesse were established to be just as capable as the more experienced Ellie. The game had Dina boasting kill counts, and Jesse managing alone against WLF and Scars, etc..
But the game gives em storm trooper aim, just so they can "lEt y0u d0 tHiS oN y0uR oWn" -trailer joel.
As for the Bald Seraphite.
I get that tank enemies should be able to tank, but having their bare scalps be made out of kevlar isn't the right way to go. Give them a helmet, or something to communicate that they wont die from a point blank shot to the dome.
Like why the hell would you design an enemy like that in THIS kind of game? Last time I checked, this franchise followed grounded rules. APPARENTLY ITS BORDERLANDS NOW, I wasnt aware I was gonna be up against an Ultimate Badass SeraphPIECE OF FAKCBDUSMAMAKJGIEBSJ
thats it. thanks for scrolling down here. good job.
I wouldn't say the companions are incompetent. Maybe you had your difficulty for them messed up
The companions are definitely an upgrade from the first game. At least they can kill people in this one. There’s much more to dislike about the game.
@@SAMSARALIVEEEEEE you can change how good the companions are too
Very excited to watch this, always such a good feeling seeing an upload coming from ya
Your take on her second reason to be angry at joel is super on point. And a very hard one for ND to portray... having inner conversation sequence will definitely not cut it.
ShuToshio I could do with a Shakespearean soliloquy in TLOU2.
I really love the critique about the lack of tension and pressure due to the lack of risk in the scavenging sections- I think you’re right on the money. I hope in the next game they explore systemic solutions to create a more dynamic world...
Somehow, TLOU2 has exceptional writing, yet is on-the-whole poorly written. It's a pretty damning realization that the only portions of the game that seem to resonate depict Joel and Ellie's fraying relationship, because it's evocative of what made the first game better.
Can always count on Matt for making the most well paced, thoughtful reviews on the platform
It's up there with AngryJoeShow's review, I'd say.
@@Reloaded2111 You mean the man that will either gush about the game or completely shout like a little child?
Nice review again man, but the part where you compare the game's melee system unfavorably to The Wonderful 101 strikes me as odd, especially since it lasts 15 minutes. Still, great job nonetheless
I was more concerned about how he spent a full ten minutes ranting against people who expect him to make a Super Mario Odyssey review. He said a lot of hurtful things including a few racial slurs and I thought there would be more backlash. I guess he has a point but the way he delivered that point was uncalled for and it wasn't the right time to talk about that topic as it was.
Still, the part where he mathematically proved that the game was less than or equal to the sum of its parts was really impressive, if only for all the differential calculus involved.
@@Tirgo69 I just watched the video and I heard no such thing. Please don't spread misinformation.
@@maverickay5807 Honestly don't know how you could have missed it.
@@Tirgo69 There was no mention of Mario Odyssey or racial slurs. Let alone for 10 minutes straight. Honestly don't know why you feel the need to spread false information
such a good and well thought out video and made me think about some new points that were shown up as well as re-consider parts of my view on the game, mainly the story
If there's one youtube channel I'd want to see more uploads from other than sleepycast, its this one. Love these long form reviews!!!
“It felt like 2 puppets I was barely in control of, acting out a story I had no impact on”. I think most of your criticisms in this video are fair and articulated well as always, but that quote is pretty much the formula for every naughty dog game. The only moments you’re meant to have full control and agency over the character are the combat encounters and some of the open exploitation areas. The rest is made to be exactly what your quote said. Naughty dog games aren’t made for you to have direct agency over what’s happening or the outcome of the plot, the appeal of their games is to slowly watch the story develop and hopefully connect to their characters and become invested in the plot. Again fair point, and in a lot of ways I’d like more agency during said combat encounters and exploration areas, but as long as naughty dog makes linear single player games, don’t expect to have any impact on the plot through gameplay.
*exploration not exploitation lol*
@@jeremyduffy8843 that's a fair counter argument , but my counter counter argument is that the game rejects its weaknesses as such , and acts as if the player has agency , the game was definitely trying to make you feel guilty for actions that you as a player had no control over , while naughty dog games lack agency I never found that to be a weakness until naughty dog started pretending that you had it .
I think the idea of not having any say in the story is fine as long as you remain consistent with your goal or motivation. For example in GOW 3, you might say that it has you controlling a "bad" person whose goals are selfish and inherently evil. But because you keep playing as Kratos, eventually you can roleplay as if you are Kratos and it remains consistent and it doesn't matter whether or not you disagree with him. You are roleplaying as a god killer and that is entertaining. With TLOU 2 it is very different. Your goal in the first 12 hours of the game was to kill Abby. You have roleplayed as Ellie and you 2 have shared the same motivation. But the moment you switched to Abby, the game expects you to switch roles entirely and have you roleplay from the beginning. This isn't exactly a terrible choice of narrative design but it does impact immersion and could even ruin it entirely for some. The worst part is that the moment you fight Ellie, killing Abby is a fail state and you need to do what the game wants you to do in order to proceed. This is a problem because the game is pretty much ignoring all the effort the player made to roleplay as Ellie and saying that it is the wrong thing to do which is almost condescending and could very much tip some players the wrong way.
I've seen some say that this choice is bold, new, and pushes storytelling in video games. I can see how you might think that it is bold or new but being bold doesn't mean it's a good choice and it's new because there's a good reason why a lot of developers do not do this and wouldn't even attempt to do this because it is a bad idea that can only be executed decently with a much better writer and gameplay director. I don't even know how that idea would even work since I'm not a game designer. The thing that I extremely disagree with and I can't even seem to understand anyone that believes it is the fact that people think this choice pushes video game storytelling forward. It doesn't and I don't and can't see how. I very much think that this actually pushes video game storytelling backwards. Interactivity is the definition and the main reason why video games are great in the first place especially when the interaction is meaningful. What this choice does is that it pushes out the meaning in interactivity and destroys what it means to be a video game. It is in no way pushing storytelling forward and if you can explain it to me why other than saying it is new or bold, it would be much appreciated but for now, I'll stick with this opinion
@@dice3041 Yeah, I think previous Naughty Dog games have always had the player and protagonist more-or-less on the same page, which is why this game has pissed so many people off. This is a story that needs a different kind of game to work, along with a few more assessments of the decisions of its characters
yeah, it feels like every ND game since jak 2 could just have been a movie and dont really lose anything,
The second ambush at the crafting table was actually shocking on my first playthrough and on the second I was more blown away that when I put a mine at the door they all bust out of you can actually kill some (sometimes all) of them and you won't get ripped off the bench just fired at. Meaning they actually do come running out of that room when I assumed they just spawned in behind you.
Appreciate all the work and thought you must put into these things
It's incredible how you repeatedly make me watch your reviews and commentaries even if it's about games I have no interest in. I stay invested in the video all the way through every time. You're doing absolutely amazing work Matthew, you should be very proud of all these videos you have created, they are of extraordinary quality.
I am curious, do you have any interest in the Half-Life games? With a new Half-Life game having released fairly recently I'd be very interested in your take on the series.
Your point about the first Abbie vs Ellie fight is spot on, and makes you really question why TLOU (as a series) is even a game at all instead of a movie/TV series.
I would've welcomed a choice to pick either Ellie or Abby after seeing both of their perspectives firsthand, and thus leading to two different endings. That way, the game forcing me to play as both of them beforehand would've been justified, and I wouldn't have felt like the designers were making my decisions for me.
Based KING, finally adding some intelligence to this discussion
But how red pilled is he?
@@seriousguy9509 this guy
I want more reviews Matthewmathosis. You are really good.
It's actually interesting to listen to a very calm and measured review to this game.
Even myself when trying to be fair and rational can't help getting overly empassioned when discussing it and allowing bias into my argument.
While I heavily detract from this game, listening to you Matt has given me a little more appreciation to alternative perspectives, even though my own opinion still remains unaltered.
Exceptional review!