• Dehumanization - July 16, 2013 2:27 p.m.

    I don't understand why in movies and games the idea of getting a vaccine requires the person that has the resistance to the disease has to die. You only need their blood, killing them is counter productive.
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 3:23 p.m.

    Actually... that's incorrect. If you get the blood of a person that's resistant to a disease, the only thing you're getting is the antibodies that make that person resistant. But said antibodies have already been created by the body. And replicating THOSE is a process that even to this day hasn't been made possible. If you want to be able to replicate the process, you need the organ or cells that create those antibodies, and find a way to replicate THEM in order to put them in other people so those antibodies can be replicated. Which in the case of TLOUS, this would be the mutated tumor on Ellie's brain. Also, most vaccines are actually nothing but controlled doses of inactive bacteria or pathogen, that are introduced gradually into the body to induce the host's immune system to create antibodies that will make the person resistant to that pathogen or bacteria in the future. But in TLOUS case, this wouldn't work because what they found wasn't an inactive or less dangerous strain of the fungus, but just a resistant host. Which is why in order to create an effective vaccine, they necessarily needed what created the antibodies, not just the antibodies themselves. To be fair to you, it COULD be possible to make a vaccine made just of the resistant, pre-created antibodies, and inject it to another person. But to this day, those kinds of vaccines are always very short term, and not completely reliable. So I'm guessing that the TLOUS doctors would rather have a shot at creating a more effective, permanent vaccine, that just a temporary one. Even if this came at the cost of sacrificing one single human being.
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 2:26 p.m.

    "After all, no one likes complainers... " I appreciate that you put those suspension dots at the end because it makes it feel like you were being facetious or sarcastic about the remark. Still, you guys do realize that you're only sounding like butthurt asshats for bringing up ME3 again when it has nothing to do with this. Right? Anyway, had fun reading this article, pretty much all of these really are nitpicks, aside from the whole rebar Issue, which I do agree doesn't really add up... But then again, that's a problem you can find in practically any popular action story, be it a book, movie or game. So if nothing else it's more of a storytelling convention than a real flaw. Loved the article! specially because, if these are the worst flaws you can find in a game, it tells you that it's then a pretty DAMN good game XD Also, i think it should be worth comparing this article with the one regarding the nitpicks of Bioshock: infinite. The ones here are genuine, small nitpicks pretty much all across the board, whereas the one about B:I did have several legitimate complaints or mistakes the game did. XD
  • Redeater - July 16, 2013 1:53 p.m.

    Were people seriously complaining about the ending? I haven't heard anything but praise for it. Not to beat a dead horse but if Mass Effect had no choices yet still had an ending this simplistically brilliant...we would have heard a fraction of the complaints.
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 2:17 p.m.

    GR and other press outlets are honestly acting like sore butt-hurt bitches whenever they feel justified enough to bring the ME3 ending thing to their favor again. Yes, there are a few people complaining about TLOUS ending but not nearly as many, and not nearly with the same intensity than with the ME3 thing to be even comparable. And that's because, y'know, TLOUS ending DOES feel like a proper, finished, NOT rushed out ending. Regardless of whether you got it, liked it or not. I'm just amused that they complain about gamers being entitled whiners regarding that scenario, and THEN it's these sites that refuse to let the topic go away XD
  • Redeater - July 16, 2013 2:33 p.m.

    Exactly. I was hesitant to bring up the ME reference simply because it has been brought up on this site and others far too many times. The only reason I did was because, once again, GR brought up their monthly mention of it. Hey GR, when even Reddit lets something's time to move on.
  • Danomeon - July 16, 2013 2:33 p.m.

    One critic said that the scalpel room standoff in which the game forces you to kill innocent medical professionals was a low point. I agree with that, actually, because up until that point I had been killing murderers, bandits, cannibals, and zombies. Suddenly being forced by the game rules to kill an innocent in order to save Ellie resulted in me having a moment of hesitation. Because of my hesitation, the game kind of 'broke' and the narrative had this awkward minute-long silence in which Joel just stared at a bunch of doctors before taking action in an urgent situation. It totally killed the vibe and broke the fourth wall. I think that should have been a cutscene. I still love the ending, though. In terms of story, it was fantastic. But maybe that one surgery room moment shouldn't have been put in the player's hands.
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    This is not a bad point I guess. But well, let me tell you my personal story regarding that scene. When I got to that scene, I was already fully invested and in the mindset that Joel was in. I had already made up my mind that I wasn0t going to let Ellie die, even if that meant murdering dozens of firefly soldiers who's only sin was to prevent ME from snatching away the one cure for humanity. For me, by the time I had reached the doctors, I had already dived all in, I had stepped all the barriers. So when this one doctor stands up to me and says "I'm not letting you take her", I didn't hesitate, I pulled the trigger and shot him in the head right there. The fact that I did this, on my own, that it wasn't scripted nor a cut-scene made the scene all the more powerful to me because even if I didn't actually had a choice, at the time I felt like I did, and me doing that showed to even myself how invested I was on what Joel was doing. So for me and my personal case, that tactic paid off, and I get the feeling that's what Naughty Dog was counting on. But on the other hand, I do see it being a problem for those like you who didn't feel ready to cross that line, and that it would have made more sense if that had been a cutscene because then that would go more into accord to the story about JOEL and what he was doing, and not so much yours as the player.
  • tehtimeisnow - July 16, 2013 1:27 p.m.

    i playd the lats of us and its a horrable gane seruoisely its so overated it just plays like a bad call of duty ripof. baclk ops2 is more better
  • Redeater - July 16, 2013 1:59 p.m.

    "The Lats Of Us" Damn, considering the average body of you people filling Comic-cons and E3's.......I'm guessing the game stars corpulent flesh bags draining Mountain Dew and cramming down Doritos. BTW, welcome back. Your brief dabbling in coherence was a little unnerving.
  • injustice45 - July 16, 2013 3:05 p.m.

    1: It's The Last of Us, and 2: it's Black Ops 2. Learn to spell and proofread before you post a comment.
  • Mcfluffan - July 16, 2013 1:23 p.m.

    Most of these things are for the sake of the player. Let's be honest, would the game really be better if you strangled someone and it alerted everyone near you? Or if your allies running from one cover to the other alerted everyone, it would dampen the experience. Of course, these are just nitpicks and not necessarily major flaws. The game is still one of the best and definitely my favorite for this gen.
  • AwesomeMan - July 16, 2013 1:07 p.m.

    You weren't kidding, this article is VERY nitpicky. But I guess when there are no glaring negatives you have to dig a little. The game was excellent, including the ending. It all felt in line with the tone of the game unlike Mass Effect, which ended the series by totally straying from the core values established throughout the trilogy by introducing random God characters...didn't even see the "new" ending it better?
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 3:37 p.m.

    If nothing else, it felt like a PROPPER ending. Still had very much the same message as the first ones, but at least this time they didn't feel like lazy, tacked-on endings anymore. Still it''s unlikely they would change your mind on the overall stuff concerning the star-child and such.
  • shawksta - July 16, 2013 12:52 p.m.

    No game is perfect, they all have their nitpicks but its not stopping Last of Us from being a great game. My own nitpicks is why they bother to make you do stuff, like say place and climb a ladder, then suddenly have a cutscene reversing what you just did. Though its a simple nitpick that was barely done in the first place, maybe just once. Also Joel takes WAY too long to strangle people, higher difficulty pretty much makes you do nothing but strangle.
  • BladedFalcon - July 16, 2013 3:35 p.m.

    Regarding Strangling: 1.- Strangling people IRL takes a MUCH longer time than what Joel took in this game. Probably like 3 times longer at least, if not 4 times longer, even with a garrote or other instrumental aid. 2.- Taking as long as it did in the game was done on purpose so that you had a good incentive to use a shiv instead. And yes, on higher difficulty you have to rely on this a lot specially because shivs become super scarce, but that is also to make you be extra careful on when and how you'd strangle someone, and make you check your position and even move your hostage to a place you couldn't be seen before doing the deed. Basically, it was done that way to force you to be more careful.
  • shawksta - July 16, 2013 4:28 p.m.

    When you put it that way, it makes sense It would've had more strangling than games about strangling XD
  • derekc1234 - July 16, 2013 12:44 p.m.

    I refuse to read this article because it's pointless. It will just tarnish one of the best memories I've had in gaming in years.
  • Moondoggie1157 - July 16, 2013 11:42 a.m.

    Loved the game, but like many other cover based shooters, the ambience was sometimes ruined by conveniently placed waist-level debris... I didn't like exploring a beautiful location to all of sudden be like "oh, I guess that's done with, time to kill people again".
  • occasionalgoldfish - July 16, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    The worst thing about this game by far is how much it makes me regret getting a 360.
  • TanookiMan - July 16, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    I actually bought a PS3 just to play this game. Totally worth it. I'm now enjoying the backlog of PS3 exclusives I haven't played yet.

Showing 21-40 of 42 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.