A very thought-provoking video about The Last Of Us....

Please note.... I am NOT the creator of this video. I have no association with it's ownership or production. I am not advertising. I am simply sharing what I think is a very thought provoking video that sheds some interesting light on The Last Of Us.

I came across this video, and by the end, my views on the game had changed. I was already in love with it when I first played through it myself, but this video made me love it in a very different, maybe even faulted way. Seriously, any fans (and even non-fans) of The Last Of Us should watch this video to the end. I can almost wholeheartedly promise that it will change your personal perspective of the game in one way or another.

Now, if you have watched the video, then I would like to ask a question.

In what way did that video make you think? I don't care if your thoughts are negative, positive, or...indifferent. Simply.... what did it make you think?

And hey, here is a bonus question: has a game ever truly impacted you on an emotional level? If so, what was it, and why?

I didn't watch the video.

But I have a question for you.... What good is an emotional video game if it evokes these emotions through cutscenes and other passive methods instead of interactively ?

Heres another question.... Wouldn't it have been simpler if They just made it a movie instead ?

Seriously if you sat and watch that ramble go on for the entire video i am in awe of your patience.

Watching a few min of the video and trying to get some clue as to what this guy thought or wanted to point out was like trying to hear a joke where they never get to the punchline and the few bits he did reveal had nothing to do with the video, game, story or even the badly done Ellen page look alike.

So in what way? well in no way whatsoever other than "wow another shitty youtube video where the creator thinks his very vague opinion matters"

See, if you actually watched the video, you would have known that he was actually specifically talking about the emotional expression through the interactive gameplay. That was literally the whole point of the video.

That's why you shouldn't give an opinion on something that you didn't even give a chance.

Hey look, another person who thinks that assumptions are the same as opinions.

Why not actually watch the video before giving an opinion on it? I think that is what reasonable people do.

@ Kevlar101

I actually played the Game its self and most of it consists of fun but slightly stressfull encounters with enemies and Tedius Scavenging for resources. I know those guys are just talking pretentious rubbish because that type of interaction is certainly not emotionally provocative.

Theres about 3 interactive scripted QTE set pieces that contained emotional resonance but considering how short and far apart they were from each other it just wasn't enough to change the nature of the games purpose... Slaying Zombie Wanabe's and going on Boring Scavenger hunts.

If your video disagrees with any of that... Then its lying.

I actually can't watch the video.

Theres also some ludonarritive dissonance which undermined the entire game.

I'd like to watch the video but I haven't played the game yet and I'm fearful of spoilers.

The perhaps watch it when you are able to.

There are a whooooole bunch of little things that you missed if you think that there were only a few interactive moments.

Silly person, this game doesn't play like a movie. Most of the time you are.... interactively looking at the television.

Wow there's an original critique if I ever saw one... Cutscenes are the obvious choice to convey emotion and character conflict, since you can show facial expression and body language while having control of the camera and pacing.

Hard to do during gameplay when you are watching the back of the character's head and busy fending off enemies. Good gameplay keeps the player interested, the story keeps them invested. I'm sure they could have made a minigame where you try to avoid getting raped and had to keep your legs closed, but why bother and would that be in good taste... Fox news would have a field day with that.

@ Pedro

lol. "Interactively Looking at the TeleVision" I get what you mean.

But the story that sparked the emotional expression, that did not come from interacting, the player had no control or autonomy there. Alot of Games from Final Fantasy to Metal Gear solid can do what The Last Of Us Did if the sacrifice the interactive nature of the game... No matter how short or long.

Its about the ratio. Lets say a game's story is is told passively using cutscenes 80% of the time.

Then lets say The Last Of Us is 80 hours of gameplay and 2hours of cutscenes. Then it would still be better if it was a movie because all that gameplay won't change that story ratio, its story is still 80% passive no matter how long the gameplay is or short the cutscenes are and Vice Versa.

even if the game doesn't stop as the story progresses it can still be classified as passive because the player has no active or interactive role in. In that scenario... The Story is running paralel with the gameplay... Not being told by it. Valve games are very good at this. They make the story happen "beside" you in away. It doesn't wrestle control away from butt it doesn't let you control it either.

@ Mr-Powers

You practically just described Quantic Dream's Games. However they use intetactive cutscenes.

I like to use Beyond Two Souls as my favourite example of interactive story telling because in Beyond the story doesn't change and your choices don't matter. IGN described it as being a passive participant is if that was a bad thing. It wasn't, because you are still a participant, not an observer. You can't control the story but you can still take part in interactively. Where else in Uncharted and The Last of Us you are an observer as far as The Story is Concerned and in Half Life or Portal or Bioshock you are the driver and the Story is the passenger... It doesn't get in the way but you're not taking part in it that much either.... Its just sort of there, next to the gameplay.

No, just no.

Eh? i dont think assumptions are the same as opinions.

Anyways i did see some of the video and honestly even skipping to the end to see if he would come with a summery was filled with rhis ramble and his fanboyism for The Last of Us.

And i dont need to force myself to sit through it all, the 5min i saw was enough.

See? Assumptions. If you had actually watched the whole video instead of making assumptions about it, you would know that he clearly addressed the fact that he thinks The Last Of Us has plenty of flaws and that it is in no way perfect. That's not exactly being a fanboy.

And you shouldn't confuse passion with fanboyism.

@ hrt_rulz01

Yes.... Just Yes ! ;)

@ Kevlar101

I can't watch the video. Is there a link to the transcribes of the discusion ?

I can work with that.

The only emotions I experienced while playing were anger and frustration over how fucking boring and tedious it was.

Already saw the video a while back ago, but glad you're sharing it because it is a great video.

And again you are mistaken, i don't assume anything i saw enough to make a perfectly valid opinion about the video and what he tried to convey. Also having that much "passion" about a game that you ignore not just your own logic, he even says it himself in the video that its just a coding to fool people, but all logic is clearly a case of a major fanboy crush on that game.

But get that you like the game nd like his opinion, but for me it was just like listening to Bush talk for 6hours about the weather.

lol thumps up for this one :D and aint that the truth, TLOU is one of those "just dont got time for that" games

Since you came up with this thread, shouldn't you first address all those questions yourself before asking others...?

I will say some things about the video, but I must admit I haven't played the game. I do not play on consoles, nor do I ever intend to, but I'm very interested in this game and I like the debates that it sparked. I watched an entire playthrough a while back, so I know the story and characters. That said, I do not feel I'm in the position to discuss any aspects of the game directly, but I do want to address the approach taken in the video, which makes me doubt it is suited for non-fans (as you stated).

The basis for his argument is a deep love for The Last of Us, which is undoubtedly triggered entirely by the game, but it makes everything he says biased. This video has little meaning for anyone who hasn't got that sincere appreciation already in place. The little things that elevated his experience of the game to incredible heights were the result of his already existing appreciation. They don't matter if you're not already invested. A non-fan would simply point out that there's no reaction from Ellie when Joel's circling around her and pushing her around. The video guy is being selective, because he ignores those flaws. When you're in a test phase, you're already accepting the limits of the game. You ignore everything that's confirming those limits (because it's uninteresting), while focusing fully on things that might break or expand those limits. In this case there's a carefully designed sequence to satisfy that need to test. It's been done in games for years and his statement that it's done so well in this game rings hollow, because you know he already cares a lot about the game.

The fundamental design choice to deliver a linear story is not seriously addressed by the guy in the video. He's just defending the choice to do so, instead of discussing viable alternatives. He's not even explaining why a linear storyline might be more effective in this context. He takes the cinematic nature of the game for granted and he appreciates it, but he doesn't look critically at his own perspective. He does not discuss different ways to approach that final scene, he just says he thought it was good and why.

When discussing the seven emotional scenes he says four of them are in gameplay, which completely depends on the perception of gameplay an individual has. One might control the movement of the avatar in those scenes, but do they really differ much from cutscenes in their way of delivery or level of player impact? So why does he emphasise the difference? What is his point here? Is the game less cinematic, because it uses less cutscenes than Uncharted? Also, in both sections (narrative and controversy) he tends to fall back on discussing the actual narrative, instead of discussing the choice to deliver a linear story. He keeps ignoring that fundamental design choice and relying on the quality of the linear story itself, which will probably only be seen as a valid argument by those who already love the game.

The entire survival section does nothing to convince me of anything. It just explains what the guy liked about the combat, which, again, will probably only appeal to people who already like the game. He's not really addressing any of the combat complaints. The fact that he acknowledges there were problems doesn't really change any of his views. All he says is that they weren't so abundant. Also, he again largely falls back on cinematic aspects (dialogues and the death sequences) to emphasise the impact of the game.

From these observations I'd have to conclude that this is a fan analysis and dissection and that it has little direct value for non-fans (but I could of course be wrong; I do not intend to present the truth, just to give my perspective). This video will most likely reinforce the positive feelings fans already have and further deepen their appreciation, which is valuable in itself, but I doubt it'll do anything for the sceptics. But it is an interesting case study. ;-P And yes, I do have too much time on my hands...