The Last Of Us 2 - now with protagonist-murdering trannies

[FranticDistortion]

 

[toro]

the game already has perfect score on Sony's store

a jew and his dog (sorry Infinitron) ... so much love ...

Spoiler

he gets the chop-chop treatment in the game

 

[Sentinel]

Is The Last of Us Part 2 the first game to feature dogs as enemies?

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

You could dropkick dogs in Fighting Force.

It may have been Gekido.

 

[Olinser]

Is The Last of Us Part 2 the first game to feature dogs as enemies?

Huh? Nowhere near close. Heck the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare dogs were annoying as shit in the campaign.

 

[Carrion]

Dogs were a common enemy type already in Wolfenstein 3D and probably earlier.

 

[Sentinel]

Is The Last of Us Part 2 the first game to feature dogs as enemies?

Huh? Nowhere near close. Heck the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare dogs were annoying as shit in the campaign.

Why is everyone only butthurt now?

 

[Olinser]

Is The Last of Us Part 2 the first game to feature dogs as enemies?

Huh? Nowhere near close. Heck the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare dogs were annoying as shit in the campaign.

Why is everyone only butthurt now?

Because apparently the game makes you defensively kill dogs, then tries to make you feel bad about killing dogs.

 

[KVVRR]

Having the dog NOT die for once in a post apocalypse zombie story would be a pretty good subversion of expectations

 

[Sentinel]

Is The Last of Us Part 2 the first game to feature dogs as enemies?

Huh? Nowhere near close. Heck the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare dogs were annoying as shit in the campaign.

Why is everyone only butthurt now?

Because apparently the game makes you defensively kill dogs, then tries to make you feel bad about killing dogs.

So? Spec Ops The Line did the same and nobody seemed to mind.

 

[Naveen]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

 

[FranticDistortion]

 

[Alienman]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

 

[Metronome]

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

I remember playing Spec Ops: The Line and using the white phosphorus against everyone but the truck or whatever in the back. I was in no danger anymore but eventually just took damage and died anyway.

 

[FranticDistortion]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command). 'Just walk away' was directed at him not player, because his actual mission was to fucking walk away.
Spec Ops is quite well written and does not deserve to be put in the same category as TLOU 2 with it's "kill doggos, hero and human with name, cause make player sad and be deep"

 

[Nito]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command). 'Just walk away' was directed at him not player, because his actual mission was to fucking walk away.
Spec Ops is quite well written and does not deserve to be put in the same category as TLOU 2 with it's "kill doggos, hero and human with name, cause make player sad and be deep"

I think the resentment towards specblops itself is a little bit unwarranted. I think where a lot of the resentment really comes from is how it's treated retrospectively by some critics and commentators as a turning point in videogame meta-narrative/examinations of player agency/ludonarrative dissonance etc etc , when really that's buying into the developer's own marketing pitch: it betrays that none of them played that many games before or after then.

 

[FranticDistortion]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command). 'Just walk away' was directed at him not player, because his actual mission was to fucking walk away.
Spec Ops is quite well written and does not deserve to be put in the same category as TLOU 2 with it's "kill doggos, hero and human with name, cause make player sad and be deep"

I think the resentment towards specblops itself is a little bit unwarranted. I think where a lot of the resentment really comes from is how it's treated retrospectively by some critics and commentators as a turning point in videogame meta-narrative/examinations of player agency/ludonarrative dissonance etc etc , when really that's buying into the developer's own marketing pitch: it betrays that none of them played that many games before or after then.

Yeah, it got retroactively turned into something it's not. It's a story about Walker going mad, and it let's player decide if he lives and escapes, can't handle guilt and suicides, or goes completely nuts. It was just a critique to ongoing glorification of military in most shooter games at the time.

Game being a guilt trip that berates player for playing and other mythical stuff came from people, who thought themselves smart for not burning those civilians and quitting the game (if their intention was to throw shade at players behavior, they would not allow them to see that those are civilians in the first place). Also weird theories getting traction, like Walker being dead after crash and whole game being his dream didn't help game's reputation.

 

[A horse of course]

lmao at all this pseud revisionism. Spec Ops was the Disco Elysium of bald marine shooters.

 

[KVVRR]

lmao at all this pseud revisionism. Spec Ops was the Disco Elysium of bald marine shooters.

But Spec Ops has actual gameplay

 

[Alienman]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command). 'Just walk away' was directed at him not player, because his actual mission was to fucking walk away.
Spec Ops is quite well written and does not deserve to be put in the same category as TLOU 2 with it's "kill doggos, hero and human with name, cause make player sad and be deep"

I would accept that if it wasn't for choices to be made in the game. From what I remember there is even a flashback showing you all the bad stuff, except when I played it I didn't do any of the bad stuff. Then comes the unavoidable phosphor incident which made the whole thing feel cheap even if the story was overall good. I always assume when the game allows you to make choices, it's an extension of you and then be denied that in the end just felt lame.

 

[Carrion]

I don't think it's bad thing in itself to try to add some sort of moral weight to killing, but it seems pretty ridiculous if the games doing it are cover shooters where by default you murder raiders and whatnot by the hundreds. If you're making a game, whatever moral weight there could possibly be is rendered meaningless if the player has no choice in the first place. If the only way to proceed in your corridor is to murder a character, all of it is one the developer and none on the player, since the only winning move is not to play. Your character can feel bad about something, of course, but don't expect much of a reaction from the player.

That's the problem with these wannabe movie writers that end up making games — they don't understand the medium they're working with. To them gameplay is simply something that happens between the story segments, rather than being something that drives the whole thing forward. That's also why the comparisons to something like PS:T are completely off the mark.

 

[Black]

lmao at all this pseud revisionism. Spec Ops was the Disco Elysium of bald marine shooters.

But Spec Ops has actual gameplay

Does popamole brown military shooter really count as gameplay tho?

 

[Wunderbar]

lmao at all this pseud revisionism. Spec Ops was the Disco Elysium of bald marine shooters.

But Spec Ops has actual gameplay

Does popamole brown military shooter really count as gameplay tho?

still better than disco

 

[FranticDistortion]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command). 'Just walk away' was directed at him not player, because his actual mission was to fucking walk away.
Spec Ops is quite well written and does not deserve to be put in the same category as TLOU 2 with it's "kill doggos, hero and human with name, cause make player sad and be deep"

I would accept that if it wasn't for choices to be made in the game. From what I remember there is even a flashback showing you all the bad stuff, except when I played it I didn't do any of the bad stuff. Then comes the unavoidable phosphor incident which made the whole thing feel cheap even if the story was overall good. I always assume when the game allows you to make choices, it's an extension of you and then be denied that in the end just felt lame.

You sure you've played it? You only get to choose things after Phosphorus, not before.

 

[CaffeineConquistador]

Apparently most dogs have owners so if you kill a dog and the master finds it he goes "Noooooo!" or something like that. Likewise, NPCs have names so they call each other out and if they find their dead pals they may cry "Oh, no, James! What happened to you?" or whatever. Then a clickbait site found that, alongside with Naughty Dog pretentious explanations concerning realism, visceral feelings, the cycles of violence, and whatnot, and wrote an article with this catchy headline, "The Last of Us 2 Gives NPC Enemies Names to Make you Feel Bad" IIRC, this and the thing about dead dogs then went viral on Twitter.

But really, you can't feel guilty when seeing the survivors' pain if you just kill everybody *tapshead.jpg*

Gonna be Spec Ops all over again. I have nothing against making the player feel bad for stuff they do, but it has to be a choice. The game will put you in areas filled with dogs and other enemies, how are you supposed to progress without killing now again? I guess the winning solution is not to play, for 2 reasons this time.

In Spec Ops point is not making you feel bad, but to show how fucked up Walker became, with him going into such denial that he came up with this imaginary idea of him being hero on a mission to stop a bad guy, with his squadmates still following him, even though they saw how crazy he is (commentary on chain of command).

Yeah, but you were controlling the character. One interpretation of the story (from the lead writer himself, Walt Williams) was Walker kicked off in the helicopter crash in the opening scene and the rest of the game was him going through purgatory. The Line all but screamed at you that you were a nasty little shit for even playing the game. I was pretty impressed at the time the studio got away with doing that.