The Last of Us [SPOILERS]

Finished it last night. I thought it ended on the perfect note - a worthwhile, intriguing character beat. Unlike most storytellers, they're aware of the power of a cut to black, the simple emotional capabilities of a close-up. It achieved a satisfying mix between uncertainty and conclusiveness, ending on a quiet moment rather than some hyperactive one - most important, one that is endearingly self-contained. I had several issues with the game, but the ending wasn't one. I don't think it leaves a hell of a lot of room for interpretation, but I don't consider that a particularly bad thing given its emotional effectiveness. Also ****ing delighted they didn't go down the 'Joel dies' route - a cliche I was fearing throughout. What we got was smarter, darker than that.

That said, I also wouldn't have begrudged it cutting to black at the giraffe bit . That was really beautiful - the kind of emotional spectacle most filmmakers have forgotten about, let alone game makers. I also loved the way the game allowed you to stand there for an extended period, allowing you to move only when you felt it was necessary. A simple way of deepening your connection with the game.

Now, I did have issues with the game overall. Although it was a significant improvement over Uncharted, I still felt somewhat of a disconnect between story and game at times. Particularly Joel's injury - while I appreciated ND shifting focus to Elly in his stead, I do think there was gameplay potential there unrealised - basically two short play sequences (one barely interactive) where he was weak before he was back and fully athletic despite the cutscenes showing him on the brink of death.

Also wish they hadn't fallen back on combat scenes so much, it did grow increasingly tiresome. Again, they do a damn good job convincing us of the characters' violent sides than Uncharted ever did. But the point was well made early on, and they fell back on 'roomful of grunts' far too often (happy with how sparingly they used infected, though). I can buy a large body count without necessitating a full on genocide. Most of the game's 'puzzles ' (a strong word) and tricks are introduced early on and simply remixed later - some more gameplay surprises would have been welcome.

Back to the good: the world building was remarkable. The detail in the environments sold them. Such a believable place to explore, with the possible exception of a few too many lanes blocked by buses All the locations felt like real, once functional ones, loaded with history and stories. Amazing to just explore. I do wish there were fewer meaningless collectibles scattered around, but for the most part the way the memos and letters were scattered around felt more natural than most games manage (coughbioshockcough), even if they conveniently survived the elemental assault when other items didn't! I can forgive that one leap o' logic.

Also, and finally, the character development. Naughty Dog are peerless in that regard - the interactions fully believable, each one strongly defined. From the banter to the grander dramatic beats, it rarely rings hollow. Also kudos for a game that doesn't fall back on stereotypes (particularly gender-based ones). It's all aided by strong storytelling ability - the way some events occur off-screen, the lack of raw, lazy sentimentality, the fact the developers know when to cut to black and when to linger for a moment longer (although the gaps between seasons sometimes felt like hours as opposed to months!). I wouldn't say it's a subtle game in terms of story and character, but it is a deeply considered one.

So definitely some minor problems, ones Id love to see refined in future Naughty Dog games. But mostly a success. What ND do is they take the basically linear action game (some semi-open exploration notwithstanding) and shame the vast majority of other developers with the delivery. It's a welcome departure from the mere rollercoaster of Uncharted, a work of more depth and value. I still don't think they've quite nailed the relationship between gameplay and narrative, but this is a significant leap in the right direction.

PS for the love of god no sequel. The story is done. There are completely new avenues to explore. Trust this to stand alone.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

What Naughty Dog did was lie to the player. They put you in a position where you thought you had a choice but there was only one way to complete it, the way Naughty Dog wanted you to. They forgot the cardinal rule of game design that a player will test their environment and ultimately this scene came off far less effective than if it was a cutscene.

Actually, there's no lie in that scene at all. In fact, it might just be the most honest moment in the whole game (note: I haven't played Spec Ops, so I'm just basing this on the Last of Us itself).

This is not your story. Its Joel's. The game never, ever denies this. We control Joel as he moves around, but he's a fully formed character and his free will is out of bounds for the player. This is Naughty Dog's story, and while they give us some basic control, they never give us agency. This is the type of story they have chosen to tell, and in their defense they never (or at least, very, very rarely) deviate from it. They have very distinctly stated their decision to avoid player choice, instead settling on the story they wanted to tell. Sure, it would be nice if game stories offered the player more agency, but the decision was made very distinctly, and at least in this case it pays many dividends.

This does boil down to the 'would you kindly' / golf club conundrums posed by Bioshock. Yes, perhaps it would be better if we had some choice to control the story's outcome, but in reality that barely ever happens (after all, so many games apparently built on 'choice' just inadvertently draw attention to the inherent practical issues and contradictions of that approach). So we're stuck, 9 or more times out of ten, with this linear progression model. What Naughty Dog have done here is realised that in a much clearer, consistent way than they ever did in Uncharted. This is Joel's journey, and we're just along for the ride.

And that scene in the surgery explicitly draws attention to that most fundamental of design philosophies. It reminds us, in no uncertain terms, that we're not in control. In a way, that's what makes it so devastating. When we shoot that surgeon, it's the final realisation, not a cheat, that there's no choice here - Joel has gone down this darkest of avenues, and there's no turning back. It's internally consistent - Joel has killed and maimed his way to where he is now without remorse, and there's not a hope in hell he's going to stop now. It makes perfect sense in terms of character. The fact that the surgeon is perceived as more helpless, 'innocent' actually makes us realise the gravity of all those other kills throughout the game. Why should a scalpel and a pair of scrubs make any difference after we've so willingly strangled and shot our way through the rest of it? The gravity of the scene is emphasised by our complete lack of free will, and would have been completely lost in a cutscene. We're a passenger and observer, whether we like it or not.

So when we pull that trigger, as we eventually must, we're being shown the darkest recesses of Joel's journey and psyche, a final manifestation of this troubled, painful world he's living in. Far from lying to us, the game is rather very purposefully drawing attention to its internal logic and rules more explicitly than it has done before. If Uncharted regularly showed a disconnect between the Drake avatar we 'controlled' and the character in the cutscenes, The Last of Us avoids that completely, and achieves a credible link by ensuring Joel is never out of character, even by forcing us to play helpless participant in his actions. If it gave us the option to walk away peacefully, well than that would actually be more dishonest because, honestly, I don't believe Joel would have done that.