The Last of Us has real heart, but not much else


Nobody likes a game where your partner can get you caught, the A.I. Is designed to not react to her running around the environment and she can't be killed so you don't have to constantly keep an eye on her, so if you're caught or killed, it is completely your fault and not your AI partner's


No, they really wouldn't, and it's a damn shame that you think they would. I think it reflects just as poorly on the industry as it does you.


Translation; "Someone expressed an opinion with which I disagree, and I, having all the mental faculties of a retarded chimpanzee, am completely incapable of handling it with even a modicum of good graces."


You two are idiots. Just...absolute drooling morons.

I think it's cute how Nate claims to have suddenly realized what all of us have known all along, but only after reading a review that he's apparently mentally incapable of handling. I'm sure that if this were a more positive review, and more in line with how Nate feels about the game, he'd go on at length about how great it is. It's also really kind of precious how he goes on to contradict himself immediately by showing us all exactly how much this particular review absolutely does matter to him, by taking a not-so-subtle dig at what he only assumes is Tom's taste in games.

Then there's WinterEdit, who thinks that he's commenting on the worthiness of the review to join the pantheon called Metacritic, when what he's actually saying is that he wishes that Metacritic would only post reviews with which he agrees so that he can go about pretending like reviews like this one don't exist.

The fucked up thing is that if you two understood what opinions are, you might understand how to better handle ones with which you disagree. The failing is not on the critic here, but on you two. You need to grow up, and maybe stop placing so much damn importance in reviews instead of just saying that you don't as a silly defense mechanism.


He didn't say that the premise is farfetched or implausible, only that it was ridiculous.


I don't understand why what is by all accounts a wholly sub-par game is being hailed as one of the best videogames of 2013. I get that a lot of folks think that the story is great, which it only really is
by comparison to the abysmally low standards set by videogames prior to it, but the whole game part of it, the part of it that's supposed to matter most, seems to be pretty universally considered to be decent at best. Not the sort of thing you'd really recommend people play under most circumstances.

So what I'm having trouble figuring out is how, with so many great games having been
released in 2013 that were actually fun to play, the part of The Last of Us over which players had absolutely no agency somehow managed to qualify it as Game of the Year for a lot of folks. Did I go into a coma and sleep through the meeting where we all got together and decided that videogames are better as films, and that gameplay is of little importance next to a good story if it really even has any importance at all? I just feel like I've wandered into the fucking Twilight Zone, and it's really sort of disconcerting, y'know?

Really though, I feel like this is the direction in which the "games as art" movement is taking us. I feel like we're so insecure and in need of validation that we've become all too willing to give a pass to games that appear on the surface to qualify as art, wholly irrespective of their actual quality as games. Sadly, with gamers being the least introspective people out there, I don't see this changing any time soon. And once developers catch on I'm sure that they'll eagerly exploit it, just like I'm sure that we'll eat it up just as eagerly. We're too stupid, and not really genuinely interested enough in what art actually is to do anything else. As long as it provides us fodder for our silly agenda, we'll gladly play whatever bullshit we're handed.


Your readers don't value your opinions, Jordan. They like you in the same way they like the rest of the critics whose aggregated opinions have kept this game at around 90 on Metacritic. It's about validation, and you happen to provide it by being such a blatant panderer. Don't delude yourself otherwise, you undeservedly self-important twit.


A Wikipedia page surely written by folks such as yourself who only take issue with Tom because you're mentally incapable of handling opinions that differ from your own.


I think the reviewer failed to give adequate reason as to why s/he dropped nearly half the possible points because the game play wasn't to their liking. Based on what was written I was expecting an 8 or 9 out of ten, so I agree that they probably wrote this review to be purposefully antagonistic. That, or they hadn't played more than a few hours of the game.


Thats funny. I've met several of them in real life that tell me exactly the opposite. But go ahead...look up some words in your thesaurus and come up with an insult telling me exactly how they think again. I'll wait here!


While I was playing TLoU I couldn't help but think that it was a game made for people who don't play videogames. I guess I was right.


That game would be so frustrating if enemies could see your ai partner especially, on survivor mode. Truth.


I'd give the game at least 4/5 for it's stunning art direction and story only. Gotta admit that the gameplay itself really does get repetitive pretty soon.


This Review is a joke!!!


This is by far the most pretentious review I've ever read. I didn't even know reviews could be pretentious until I read this rubbish. Just another example of how versatile video game journalism is at being untrustworthy garbage.


Worst review ever.


Well, 9 months later and it is the most awarded game of all time, so suck a dick you ass wipe! XD


Yebki. Eto odna iz samix krutix igr za vse vremia!!! 10/5.
A vi gorite v ady, mrazi!


Such a stupid review, so now games are all about shooting stuff? Games are an experience, a PLAYABLE experience, this game is a masterpiece, out of this world graphics (according to the generation) and remarkable characters, story and gameplay.


About the "silly" zombies: just so you know, there are strains of fungi that "zombify" certain species of insects and cause their heads to swell and grow lumpy. I think it was an apt method of zombification for a game.