Yeah. Dammit.
I wonder if there'll be a way to just knock them or or something.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Every Human enemy in Last of Us Part II has a name
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
Yeah. Dammit.
I wonder if there'll be a way to just knock them or or something.
You mean his name WAS Robert Paulson and now I own his three bullets and the string he was always carrying
They're just a bunch of pixels dudes. I'm gonna find and I'm gonna kill every last one of those dogs, including their owners.
Weird that the game in a survival setting is trying to make you feel bad for killing rapists and murderers that always start the violence in every encounter. It's not like you have a choice...
Plus I'm expecting a lot of repeated lines and names which feels pretty immersion breaking.
Plus I'm expecting a lot of repeated lines and names which feels pretty immersion breaking.
Gore is fine in GoW? You can behead dudes and rip them in half with your bare hands.
I care. It's way more natural and immersive this way.
People in real life don't just go 'Oi, he's over there!' and basically act as interchangeable cannon fodder. The attempt at grounding the combat, making it feel ruthless and intimate is a big step forward. I don't want to want to kill these guys. But i'm going to when it comes to it.
I think that's cool. It adds a little extra weight to your actions, and more importantly, helps the team stay cognisant of the amount of enemies you put in a game. I'm not a fan of encounter design where you can send wave after wave of faceless, expendable clone troopers after the player. Anything to ground that whole thing helps with the world building, I think.
GoW 2016's violence is closer to fantasy levels of gore, enemies have yellow juiced blood spilled from them and you don't see Kratos brutalizing everybody as he did in previous games. In comparison, gore in GOW 1-3 was far more sadistic and you could feel the insanity in Kratos actions on every sequence.
In that regard, i feel that what Last of Us 2 is trying to do here is really important, as far as pushing boundaries in immersion. Ther're like: "okay this is a post-apocalyptic society, rules and morals don't exist anymore, so we picture this as a society sank in chaos. Every action, no matter how violent it is, is necessary for survival".
Survival of the fittest at any cost.
"There's a lot of really interesting things under the hood, but it's an extraordinary technical accomplishment to have these named NPCs. When we first came up with the idea, we thought it was this ridiculous pipe dream, but we decided to take it on and they figured out a way to make it work."
I wonder why this is considered so difficult? They might have done somewhat complex audio splicing to reduce the number of total lines needed to be recorded for battle chatter, but even that isn't wildly difficult provided the markers are in the right place and the names are delivered in the same manner. You could use audio streaming even if you need a whole bunch of new raw .wav files for each nearby NPC.
I wonder why this is considered so difficult? They might have done somewhat complex audio splicing to reduce the number of total lines needed to be recorded for battle chatter, but even that isn't wildly difficult provided the markers are in the right place and the names are delivered in the same manner. You could use audio streaming even if you need a whole bunch of new raw .wav files for each nearby NPC.
There are some really gruesome finishers in GOW that are easy to miss, against stronger enemies like the Wulvers and Travellers.
The Wulver one where he rips their jaw is especially disgusting.
Playing the first "The Last of US" was a really strange experience for me. Never feel something like that...
Gee, I came to the thread just to make THIS EXACT Fight Club joke!
This. The fact that they are going for a 'grounded' game has me hyped more than anything else. Everything they've shown is designed to achieve that goal.
Enemies are smart, communicate, call eachother by name. The gun recoils forcefully, with gunfire that is almost deafening, leaving a ringing in your ears when you fire the shotgun inside. The impact of every shot feels savage, enemies react to every hit and go down with one or two shots to the chest gasping for air. The shotgun decimates people from close range.
It's so very far removed from the 'regular' third person shooter where you just empty magazine after magazine on fodder enemies who barely react. It makes it an entirely different game and playstyle. They've done an excellent job.
I wonder if we'll ever get to a point where you kill less than 10 people throughout a game. This is all well and good, but if you're going through the phone book killing people, then what's the point? Certainly, a large body count and blood on your hands can mean something but so often it games it doesn't.
I'm guessing the challenge is the number of permutations when NPCs have to react to the state of every NPC around them - so Annie needs to have lines calling out to Bob that Charles is dead but also lines to Charles that Bob is gone or lines to Bob that Charles is fighting someone etc. The number of possibilities escalates fast.
Lmao can you imagine?
"Allen?! No! He really loved just kicking back and playing spades with the gang.....oh no, and Sarah too?! She was such a great seamstress, she was more than the apocalyptic cutthroat she appeared to be....curse whoever did this! Curse you!"
Personally, I'm most interested in seeing how Ellie reacts to hearing their names or sum.
Not really.
The Last of Us makes you kill the doctors at the end, for example, but many people talk about how they tried to avoid doing it and felt horrible upon realizing there was no way around it, myself included.
There are, in fact, games where you don't have to kill anyone.
A post apocalyptic revenge thriller probably isn't the best place to start looking for that, though.
It's a cool idea that makes the enemies feel like more than just targets.
They must've recorded a ridiculous number of voice lines though compared to what is usually needed for enemy NPCs.
They must've recorded a ridiculous number of voice lines though compared to what is usually needed for enemy NPCs.
Well kill me dead. I should have said 'games of this kind' stupid me for thinking that the topic of the thread would provide context for what I was saying.
There are some really gruesome finishers in GOW that are easy to miss, against stronger enemies like the Wulvers and Travellers.
The Wulver one where he rips their jaw is especially disgusting.
"Watered down gore" lol
Yeah I too would love a third person shooter action game to... Not have any shooting
??? People have weird desires. Your intent was clear but just doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.
"Damn I wish this Mario game didn't have so much jumping. Imagine if there was a Mario game were you could just stroll to the end of the level"
There are dedicated stealth games for what you want, like MGS4/5, Dishonored, etc. This particular brand of look at the booty shooties just isn't ripe for pacifist mode.
I just wondered this.
Can you just try to talk to them instead of stab them all? I think that would be more impactful.
So you are telling me soldier who have PTSD for killing, sometimes, really bad people are, what, anormal?
Do you ever talk to someone (not some gangsta shit, a "normal" person like Ellie) who murder an other human without is willing? How does he/she feel about that.
Glorified murder is everywhere around us and we've been raised with different content where it is OK to kill "bad guys" or any "ennemies" (who often aren't bad guys). It is OK and the killer won't have any feeling about what he had done. This is not how the human brain works and we finally have content who can tackle this problem.
It's not that I want the game not to have any shooting. Just less of a body count. Perhaps my desire wasn't clearly expressed after all. I wasn't speaking in terms of extremes, more that it would be a challenging and potentially rewarding bit of design.
It's not unimaginable that after killing 100 people it doesn't matter that one of them is called John and another is Susan.
Druckmann said in an interview that you can bypass most of the combat in the game, probably by sneaking
ND have said you can just sneak past enemies. You have to choose to kill poor Jeff and his adorable man eating doggo.
Would be impactful if they had relationships as well. You kill someones lover and they end up crying over their corpse. That's some next-level moral drama right there.
OP
OP
I think that is an odd design decision. Can I play the game without killing people? am I able to use the supposed NPC relationship to my advantage?
Did Naughty Dog include them solely as a guilt trip mechanic?
Did Naughty Dog include them solely as a guilt trip mechanic?
Um, that's not the case with TLOU.
There are several instances where you're just passing through another person's territory, people just trying to survive, so you shanking them in thefucking neck is actually you being the murderer. It's why I tried to play the game killing as few people as possible. Unless they're like David's group, then they are just out trying to survive and I'm the trespasser.
yeah im just trying to sneak around and they are attacking me, i dont give a fuck about those digital humans or digital dogs tbh
Well, maybe the day people massively start to buy those games so AAA can have that body count and sell 15m copies. :P
