It would harm accessibility but TLOU 1/2 would get more acclaim for its gameplay if survivor was the only difficulty

[Deleted member 2595]

intriguing. I'm bashing through a low difficulty NG+ to try and get all the collectibles, but I may try some encounters on survivor difficulty as this sounds interesting. I'm similarly useless :)

Click to shrink...

Definitely try it. Survivor is a fucking incredible experience. It immerses you in every encounter on another level. You REALLY feel the stakes behind every single decision you make in an encounter.

And the best part is that the gameplay in TLOUP2 (and all of ND's games for the last decade) is so fucking good that replaying encounters over and over again is fine. They are so dynamic; every attempt pans out a totally different way and usually results in crazy/awesome moments.

It's actually not a shame, this is not one of those games. On story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad and leads to frustration.

Click to shrink...

This is totally, totally untrue. Have you tried Uncharted 4, TLL, TLOU or TLOUP2 on Hard/Survivor/Crushing? Because all of them are FANTASTIC on highest difficulty.

What you say was true back in 2008 when story-driven action games were in their wonky adolescent years, but Naughty Dog mastered good difficulty balancing with Uncharted 2 and all their games since have been FANTASTIC on higher difficulties. Because their mechanics and AI are so good, every encounter feels totally fun and dynamic when the enemies are pushing you to your limit.

To boot, in The Last of Us, it immerses you in the characters' shoes on a whole nother level. When you really DO have to make the decision between spending your last bullet in a hail mary attack, or using your last rag to make a molotov or a medkit, when there are 6 enemies left for you to beat. You FEEL the heroes' plight really distinctly.

(Uncharted 3 is the exception to this rule. Really poor encounter design fucks that game on higher difficulties.)

 

[Decarb]

I get what OP is saying. The game not only switches difficulty but straight up switches genres as you go from Very Light to Survivor. So OP wanting people to experience pure TLoU2 instead of Uncharted with zombies is understandable. That being said I'll never advocate for less difficulty options. Let people play and enjoy however they like.

 

[Voodoowoolf]

I totally agree with you OP. I'm 26 hours in currently at

Spoiler: Midway

Post Seattle Day 2

and playing on survivor from the jump has gave me one of the best experiences in gaming. I mostly stealth but 5 out of 10 times I get caught and I have more than enough shotgun/sniper/pistol ammo etc to deal with the situation as I'm constantly searching for resources. Like getting caught in this game is so exciting as it ends up being a bloody/dirty scrap which gives you a rush like no other. During the hospital section I went up to the tower and sniped a dog and its handler, that alerted everyone to my location so I jumped into the hospital and what ensued was one of the best fights I've had in this game. Holding people hostage, shotgunning, running up on people with an axe. Another was the E3 demo section, the big guy with the axe has two goons with him so I threw a molotov at him and then put a mine bomb at the door which the two goons walked straight into then I turned and finished the big goon off with an axe to the face. The level design just adds to the options of combat at your disposal. Man this gameeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[Bearwolf]

I'm struggling on normal because I have trouble with dual stick games. It's not so bad that I have to use assist mode, but I would absolutely return it if survivor was the only difficulty. People aren't monolithic. Options are good.

 

[beelulzebub]

Having played grounded in the original, I've never been more angry at an OP premise on this website until now. Lmao

 

[Chettlar]

It's actually not a shame, this is not one of those games. On story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad and leads to frustration.

Click to shrink...

How is story antithetical to challenge?

Do you people just, not like engaging in a story beyond observation? Do you just divide games into "challenge vs story"?

That is astounding to me. Is getting immersed in a story yourself just not a thing for you? Do you just, not appreciate a game telling its story through gameplay? Because if so, I don't see how you can argue a game about the literal apocalypse where people are scraping away to survive should plop you down into it and have you engage in none of that. How does that not utterly numb the effect of things for you? Why are you playing a game at that point...

This notion that difficulty is this linear scale that you can make go up and down and provide an equivalent experience to everyone does not make sense to me, at all. That's not how difficulty works. It's way more complicated than that. And I don't understand how you can view that in a total vacuum separate from the story. Do ya'll just like not get immersed n shit?

 

[Fisty]

I went for Hard because I was expecting TLOU1 level of difficulty, but I am constantly topped up on resources and bombs/molotovs/health and only die once or twice on the tougher encounters. I didn't expect a rough ride but I also didn't expect a relative cakewalk. Stealth is OP lol

 

[Yappa]

Dying in a story driven game can really take me out of the story to the point that I still think about my failure in the cut scene that follows, and that's not what I want.
While I would get better with practice and improve my understanding of the combat mechanics, I don't think it would be worth it for me storywise.

 

[oRuin]

Played the original on surviver but it seemed to turn into a puzzle game when I started hitting heavy clicker areas. Die, reload, try something else. Just got too much. Maybe I'll give it another go someday.

 

[Dussck]

I thought Hard was great as a difficulty, but I rather have them not checkpointing too much. If I die: punish me and let me start the whole encounter over again, not checkpoint it halfway. I sometimes felt I cheated my way through the game and not earning the progression.

 

[Deleted member 2595]

I'm playing the game with the difficulty all the way down and I'm enjoying it for the exploration and story. If it was super hard I don't think I'd pick it up as I'm not a huge fan of the gameplay really.

Click to shrink...

An interesting contention is that TLOU on Hard/Survivor isn't actually too hard. It's very "fair". If you play carefully and methodically, you'll get through fine. Control your resources, don't take unnecessary risks, learn how to improvise quickly. Also don't fight when you don't need to - you can avoid/sneak past 9/10 fights in the game, I'd say.

Hard/Survivor lead to amazing situations where risk/reward during encounters becomes a fantastic balancing act.

In one of TLOUP2's final encounters, I reached the exit point without being seen and with having taken out 2 of the 10 enemies in the area. I was like "fuck yeah, I MGS'd my way through this". Then i realised there was a shop front 20 feet away that seemed to be LOADED with ammo and resources... where I was carrying nothing but a first aid kit and 2 bullets in each of my guns. I knew that poking my head out to loot it would be a risk. If the risk paid off, I'd be set for the game's final sections. If I fucked up, I would probably be dead and have to replay that 15 minute encounter.

What happened? I got in to the shop front. I looted it. I crawled back to the exit point... and a dog caught my scent.

Cue one of the most incredible and tense things I've ever experienced in a game, ever. Me, crawling through grass towards the exit point. A dog 10 feet behind me, sniffing along my path. His owner a few paces behind going "what is it, boy?"

Ultimately I reached the exit point and flipped on to my back under a low box. The exit point was a pallet/door I had to force open, so I'd be attacked if I went for it. I had a couple of shots left on my silenced pistol, no arrows. I aimed at where the dog would round the corner of the box. The dog emerged, saw me, and I popped a shot in its head. It tumbled backwards. The owner recoiled. "No! She's here!" I fired at the guy and missed. He fired at me and missed. I was out of ammo, so I Dodged forward out of lying down and rushed for the guy. He shot me in the shoulder and I fell over. I dodged forward again and beat him to death, almost on the verge of death myself after that one gunshot. As shouts and gunfire emerged from further back in the level, I spun and made it to the exit point just in time.

Like... wtf. Just incredible. That entire amazing sequence of events stemmed from me making the decision to range out of safety for ONE set of resources. And you ONLY get that kind of super intense interplay of mechanics and dynamics on Survivor difficulty.

Played the original on surviver but it seemed to turn into a puzzle game when I started hitting heavy clicker areas. Die, reload, try something else. Just got too much. Maybe I'll give it another go someday.

Click to shrink...

The sequel is about twenty times more dynamic and open than the original. On Survivor it's way more improvisational and "free form".

 

[Wispmetas]

This is totally, totally untrue. Have you tried Uncharted 4, TLL, TLOU or TLOUP2 on Hard/Survivor/Crushing?

What you say was true back in 2008 when story-driven action games were in their wonky adolescent years, but Naughty Dog mastered good difficulty balancing with Uncharted 2 and all their games since have been FANTASTIC on higher difficulties. Because their mechanics and AI are so good, every encounter feels totally fun and dynamic when the enemies are pushing you to your limit.

(Uncharted 3 is the exception to this rule. Really poor encounter design fucks that game on higher difficulties.)

Click to shrink...

Mate. I'm not saying the higher difficulties are badly balanced. I'm saying limiting the difficulty choice of these games to only the hardest/most challenging one, would alienate the part of the fanbase that is excited for these games for their story, setpieces and overall cinematic feel.

The fact that the higher difficulties are better now is great, does not mean they should be the only difficulty option like OP is saying.

How is story antithetical to challenge?

Do you people just, not like engaging in a story beyond observation? Do you just divide games into "challenge vs story"?

That is astounding to me. Is getting immersed in a story yourself just not a thing for you? Do you just, not appreciate a game telling its story through gameplay? Because if so, I don't see how you can argue a game about the literal apocalypse where people are scraping away to survive should plop you down into it and have you engage in none of that. How does that not utterly numb the effect of things for you? Why are you playing a game at that point...

This notion that difficulty is this linear scale that you can make go up and down and provide an equivalent experience to everyone does not make sense to me, at all. That's not how difficulty works. It's way more complicated than that. And I don't understand how you can view that in a total vacuum separate from the story. Do ya'll just like not get immersed n shit?

Click to shrink...

You don't need to play on the highest difficulty to feel imersed, what a piss poor argument.

 

[Chettlar]

intriguing. I'm bashing through a low difficulty NG+ to try and get all the collectibles, but I may try some encounters on survivor difficulty as this sounds interesting. I'm similarly useless :)

Click to shrink...

Yup. I am glad for easy because yeah I'll do a collectables run later lol.


But seriously, as a bad player, survival is AMAZING. This idea that OP only likes it because they are good is bullshit. Ya'll aren't as bad as you think you are. I'm really bad, and I'm having a great time. Ya'll just don't want to put in the time to really get into the game and learn it. I've died a lot, and it feels super exciting every time I get out of an encounter. I'm panting along with my character.

I know some people just struggle with twin sticks and that's fine, but I don't think survival is so impossible as some people seem to be making it.

Mate. I'm not saying the higher difficulties are badly balanced. I'm saying limiting the difficulty choice of these games to only the hardest/most challenging one, would alienate the part of the fanbase that is excited for these games for their story, setpieces and overall cinematic feel.

The fact that the higher difficulties are better now is great, does not mean they should be the only difficulty option like OP is saying.



You don't need to play on the highest difficulty to feel imersed, what a piss poor argument.

Click to shrink...

I'm arguing with your ridiculous assertion that a story game and a challenging game are two opposed characteristics.

YOU'RE the one who said it couldn't be a game where difficulty enhances the experience because it's a story driven game. That is ridiculous. In what world is story and difficulty opposed?

 

[Deleted member 2595]

Mate. I'm not saying the higher difficulties are badly balanced. I'm saying limiting the difficulty choice of these games to only the hardest/most challenging one, would alienate the part of the fanbase that is excited for these games for their story, setpieces and overall cinematic feel.

The fact that the higher difficulties are better now is great, does not mean they should be the only difficulty option like OP is saying.

Click to shrink...

Ah yeah, you said have it be "the default is bad." My bad.

I'm not sure if we can say it being the default is bad, as long as there is the option for lowering the difficulty. Like, if "Normal" on TLOUP2 was actually Hard or even Survivor, that wouldn't be problematic at all if you could easily pop to the menu and drop it to easy.

So many people I know won't even TRY Survivor and assume it's no good. Like, that's an opinion from 10 years ago, in my opinion. All recent AAA games with high difficulty options have been fantastically balanced. IMO The Last of Us's gameplay isn't even that good UNTIL it's on the highest difficulties.

 

[Chettlar]

Mate. I'm not saying the higher difficulties are badly balanced. I'm saying limiting the difficulty choice of these games to only the hardest/most challenging one, would alienate the part of the fanbase that is excited for these games for their story, setpieces and overall cinematic feel.

The fact that the higher difficulties are better now is great, does not mean they should be the only difficulty option like OP is saying.

Click to shrink...

You are ignoring the fact that for many people, engaging them in the world more through gameplay helps deliver the story in a way that makes them appreciate it more. This idea that difficulty is bad for people who like story is BULLSHIT.

 

[Wispmetas]

I'm arguing with your ridiculous assertion that a story game and a challenging game are two opposed characteristics.

YOU'RE the one who said it couldn't be a game where difficulty enhances the experience because it's a story driven game. That is ridiculous. In what world is story and difficulty opposed?

Click to shrink...

I never said they were, of course the difficulty can enhance your experience with the game.

I said having only the hardest option in the game as default would be a bad idea and would alienate a big part of the fanbase that preffers these games as a cinematic experience with great setpieces and such.

I'm talking directly to what the OP is saying. That the game should only have the hardest difficulty.

You are ignoring the fact that for many people, engaging them in the world more through gameplay helps deliver the story in a way that makes them appreciate it more. This idea that difficulty is bad for people who like story is BULLSHIT.

Click to shrink...

And that's great. For the people that want that. Why take the option away from people that dont?

 

[Deleted member 32135]

There is a problem for me with Survivor difficulty.

Survivor encourages the stealth approach so you can save as much resources as possible, thus limiting yourself in some way the possibilities handed to you. Therefore I have less fun with it. Are you going to use your ammunition for two patrolling guards or are you going to wait behind that wall until they pass nearby and a triangle prompt appears on screen for a free kill? I mean, yeah, I like to identify which guards will give me more problem because of their high position over the ground for example so I can kill them stealthy with the bow, or going first for the dogs so I can move around easily... but after that it ends on a waiting game so you can safely kill the rest of the guards which is something a bit boring tbh.

The other problem is that the reset checkpoint is so free to use that if things go badly you almost get not penalty for restarting from a previous checkpoint. I know that CP on survivor difficulty are sparse than in hard difficulty but even then the penalty is too low and if I have been saving some shotgun bullets for some time until I face the next infected group be sure I will restart it if things go bad. Therefore, the pressure feeling not there at that point.

I guess you could play survivor with resources set on hard or normal but that would defeat the point of your OP.

So, gameplay wise I think there is not that much difference between these difficulties... yeah, patrolling guards are more aware and from time to time they double check their back which is cool, but the bigger difference I find is how the survivor difficulty expects you to go the stealth route... Which I don't find particularly great in this series.

 

[Deleted member 2595]

There is a problem for me with Survivor difficulty.

Survivor encourages the stealth approach so you can save as much resources as possible, thus limiting in some way the possibilities handed to you. Therefore I have less fun with it. Are you going to use your ammunition for two patrolling guards or are you going to wait behind that wall until they pass nearby and a triangle prompt appears on screen for a free kill? I mean, yeah, I like to identify which guards will give me more problem because of their high position over the ground for example so I can kill them stealthy with the bow, or going first for the dogs so I can move around easily... but after that it ends on a waiting game so you can safely kill the rest of the guards which is something a bit boring tbh.

The other problem is that the reset checkpoint is so free to use that if things go badly you almost get not penalty for restarting from a previous checkpoint. I know that CP on survivor difficulty are sparse than in hard difficulty but even then the penalty is too low and if I have been saving some shotgun bullets for two hours be sure I will restart it if things go bad. Therefore, the pressure feeling is not there.

I guess you could play survivor with resources set on max but that would defeat the point of your OP.

So, gameplay wise I think there is not that much difference between these difficulties... yeah, patrolling guards are more aware and from time to time they double check their back which is cool, but the bigger difference I find is how the survivor difficulty expects you to go the stealth route... Which I don't find particularly great in this series.

Click to shrink...

It's possible to still have great combat/action in survivor, it just becomes more "pop out, fight, quickly hide" than all-out gunfights. You know that sticking your neck out results in rapid death, so whenever you do, you try to only do it in safe locations or where you know you can hide again. It feels super thrilling because it's a burst of action which could easily kill you.

Id agree overall that it makes you lean into stealth, more, though

 

[Chettlar]

I never said they were, of course the difficulty can enhance your experience with the game.

I said having only the hardest option in the game as default would be a bad idea and would alienate a big part of the fanbase that preffers these games as a cinematic experience with great setpieces and such.

I'm talking directly to what the OP is saying. That the game should only have the hardest difficulty.



And that's great. For the people that want that. Why take the option away from people that dont?

Click to shrink...

You still aren't acknowledging that what you said was bs. What you said did not allow for "And that's great." What you said excluded that as a possibility. You spoke as if difficulty was antithetical to story. It isn't.

And no you are not talking to what OP is saying. OP never said it should only have the hardest difficulty. It's very clear what the OP means. It's an intellectual exercise about one specific thing. Why is that so hard? It really should not be. You don't have to take an intellectual exercise and turn it into a mandate. Or well if you do that says more about you than it does about OP, because OP never, EVER said that.

 

[flobber]

I just finished TLOU2 on hard, it was an ok challenge but plenty of gathering and taking good advantage of stealth I think made it not as hard as I expected. I was worried that Survivor would be too hard for my first play-through but perhaps should just have gone Survivor from the start.

It sort of feels like there are too many difficulty options at the beginning, I'm now trying to decide if I should do NG+ run on Hard+ or Survivor+

 

[NightShift]

At least the resources should be set to survivor by default. They're still plentiful (amount as much as TLoU1 on normal) but the amount the game gives you on normal is absurb. It makes exploration nearly pointless.

 

[Deleted member 2595]

I just finished TLOU2 on hard, it was an ok challenge but plenty of gathering and taking good advantage of stealth I think made it not as hard as I expected. I was worried that Survivor would be too hard for my first play-through but perhaps should just have gone Survivor from the start.

It sort of feels like there are too many difficulty options at the beginning, I'm now trying to decide if I should do NG+ run on Hard+ or Survivor+

Click to shrink...

I did the same but actually pushed it to Survivor for a bit on my original run. But kept dying in some particular bits while I was keen to see the story, so reduced it to Hard. It was the right decision.

second playthrough? Survivor+ all the way.

The last of us is incredible in that it's gameplay is actually mega skill based. Play it a second time on a harder difficulty and you've got way more tricks up your sleeve and many situations are easier to deal with. You understand the AI and the level design way better.

 

[Reckheim]

yeh, kind of bummed I didn't start playing on survivor difficulty, find the game a bit too easy. Maybe they could of made it the default difficulty.

probably wont replay it anytime soon either.

 

[Turnabout Sisters]

It should be considered a flaw of any modern game for the difficulty settings to not be built into the mechanics of the game, like a certain series we all know. Traditional difficulty settings not only shame the less-able and inexperienced, they rob players of the intended challenge if they choose the wrong option for themselves. I won't pretend like designing that kind of system is easy however.

 

[shaneo632]

They already get near-universal acclaim for their gameplay and get to be accessible at the same time. They don't need more, and I'm not sure I even agree with your hypothesis really.

I died like 40 times on Normal difficulty so I think I would've probably given up on Survivor lmao.

 

[Wispmetas]

You still aren't acknowledging that what you said was bs. What you said did not allow for "And that's great." What you said excluded that as a possibility. You spoke as if difficulty was antithetical to story. It isn't.

And no you are not talking to what OP is saying. OP never said it should only have the hardest difficulty. It's very clear what the OP means. It's an intellectual exercise about one specific thing. Why is that so hard? It really should not be. You don't have to take an intellectual exercise and turn it into a mandate. Or well if you do that says more about you than it does about OP, because OP never, EVER said that.

Click to shrink...

What I said isn't bs. This game relies on it's story as much as it does gameplay. The story is a big selling point. Having only one difficulty option and it being the hardest, while sure would make the experience more focused, would be a bad decision, because then your ability to experience the story would be gated behind your ability do be good enough at the game. And if not it would deter into a trial and error type of deal where you die a bunch just to get to the next cutscene, and that is frustrating if it's not the experience you're looking for.

Note: I'm talking about people that play these games for their story specifically, I know there are people that want to engage more with the gameplay and world, and for them you have the harder difficulty.

This is basically what I said in my 1st post, but with less words.

Also, not agreeing with OP is not engaging with the "intelectuall exercise"? get out of here.

 

[Deleted member 32135]

It's possible to still have great combat/action in survivor, it just becomes more "pop out, fight, quickly hide" than all-out gunfights. You know that sticking your neck out results in rapid death, so whenever you do, you try to only do it in safe locations or where you know you can hide again. It feels super thrilling because it's a burst of action which could easily kill you.

Id agree overall that it makes you lean into stealth, more, though

Click to shrink...

Yes, of course it is. Even some additions like the risk situation created when you are hit with an arrow and you get out of cover in order to take it off, are cool. And it is a way by the game to acknowledge the extremely safe approach you can take in these encounters which certainly is not the most fun but the most efficient and the one the survivor mode incentivstes, to try and shake the things a bit. Dogs are there for the same reason...

That's why I said in the previous post that the most interesting part of combat is the beggining of it when you need to understand what weapon to use against which enemy to make the whole situation better and easier for you (targeting the enemy on the roof that can see you easily, go for the dogs that restric your movement more...). After you end with those two or three key enemies, the rest in survivor is a game of waiting and moving slowly so you can finish the other six men with stealth kills. Thats the part I find not as interesting and my main problem with the combat.

 

[Chettlar]

What I said isn't bs. This game relies on it's story as much as it does gameplay. The story is a big selling point. Having only one difficulty option and it being the hardest, while sure would make the experience more focused, would be a bad decision, because then your ability to experience the story would be gated behind your ability do be good enough at the game. And if not it would deter into a trial and error type of deal where you die a bunch just to get to the next cutscene, and that is frustrating if it's not the experience you're looking for.

Note: I'm talking about people that play these games for their story specifically, I know there are people that want to engage more with the gameplay and world, and for them you have the harder difficulty.

This is basically what I said in my 1st post, but with less words.

Click to shrink...

You said

" On story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad and leads to frustration."

That is an untrue statement.

Maybe for some people having a difficulty too high can lead to enough frustration as to no longer be benefiting the story experience. That I will buy. But that is not what you said.

 

[Wispmetas]

You said

" On story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad and leads to frustration."

That is an untrue statement.

Maybe for some people having a difficulty too high can lead to enough frustration as to no longer be benefiting the story experience. That I will buy. But that is not what you said.

Click to shrink...

Okay so I just needed to add "FOR SOME PEOPLE, on story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad BECAUSE IT CAN lead to frustration." for what I said to make sense. Okay got ya.

Sorry if I didn't specify I wasn't talking about everyone. You're just arguing in bad faith at this point.

Note that at no point am I defending in my post, or any other, that a story driven game should not have a hard mode.

 

[flobber]

I did the same but actually pushed it to Survivor for a bit on my original run. But kept dying in some particular bits while I was keen to see the story, so reduced it to Hard. It was the right decision.

second playthrough? Survivor+ all the way.

The last of us is incredible in that it's gameplay is actually mega skill based. Play it a second time on a harder difficulty and you've got way more tricks up your sleeve and many situations are easier to deal with. You understand the AI and the level design way better.

Click to shrink...

I probably made the right decision too in that case then, think i would have done the same had I tried Survivor. Guess I may as well give Survivor+ a go, I can always go back if I'm not enjoying it. The NG difficulties are harder but I'm not sure to what degree which I why I was considering Hard+ first.

Actually considering doing a non-stealth run on an easier difficulty first just to have some fun with the combat and focus on finding the few collectables I missed.

 

[TheRulingRing]

God no, scavenging is the single worst element of the game.

Survivor making that aspect even worse would be game ruining.

 

[AfterCoffee]

The lower difficulties gives the best action experience ever =) the game is crazy as shit

 

[DIE BART DIE]

I agree with you OP.

Predictably you're being torn apart in here even though you're not actually advocating for the removal of the included options.

Ultimately though, people enjoy having the range of options they do for this kind of narrative game.

Something like Dark Souls where its challenge and spare narrative are integral parts of the experience should absolutely never have an easy mode.

 

[random88]

It would certainly have less people calling it interactive movie. TLoU gameplay is amazing and survivor difficulty definitely makes the most sense in the context of the game world. Unlike Uncharted on hard or crushing, it felt well balanced to me, there wasn't a lot of places where I died multiple times and I heard that TLoU 2 is easier than that.

 

[Chettlar]

Okay so I just needed to add "FOR SOME PEOPLE, on story driven games, having the highest difficulty be the default is bad BECAUSE IT CAN lead to frustration." for what I said to make sense. Okay got ya.

Sorry if I didn't specify I wasn't talking about everyone. You're just arguing in bad faith at this point.

Note that at no point am I defending in my post, or any other, that a story driven game should not have a hard mode.

Click to shrink...

I think you just don't like being held to what you said. I'm not being pedantic. What you said was just untrue.

 

[sinny]

No, but im playing on hard and it feels like an easy mode of other games

It's pretty clear the developer think of this almost like an interactive movie and I'm ok with that. It's not dark souls and people play this game for the story.

 

[Powerofthecloud]

Accessibility > Acclaim

 

[AM_LIGHT]

I am currently playing it on normal the first time , 20 hours in, and the game is enjoyable as hell , I am enjoying it much more than UC4 as I feel the slow moment to moment gameplay fits it thematically better with the in UC4.

 

[nachum00]

Really? I think it would sale way less and the metacritic score would be maybe 5 points lower.

 

[Capt_Shanu]

I was going to give this game a hard pass until I read about all of the difficulty sliders the OP describes. This just got moved to my buy list. Thanks OP!

 

[MikeH]

Accesibility benefits the players because more people can play the game, acclaim benefits......Naughty Dog I guess?

Nothing stops hardcore players from selecting the highest difficulty, while more casual players or people only interested in the story can go for lower difficulties.

Word of mouth exists, and threads like this are good because they let people know the challenge on the highest difficulty is actually good. But focusing it on acclaim feels weird to me.

 

[Yasuke]

Yeah, nah.

 

[Vic20]

Played half the game on survivor, it wasn't fun and didn't make the combat more deep just more frustrating.

 

[Bigwombat]

I haven't even really looked into the options for this game except for changing the sensitivity of the cameras. So many people raving about the options system which is amazing. Ill definitely mess around with it more on new game plus.

Played through on normal and there definitely was a lot of ammo and supplies. I enjoyed the amount though for a first playthrough cause some of the baddies are real assholes!

 

[pleaseinsertdisctwo]

Absolutely not

Not everyone enjoys dying in a game or treating a game like some project or assignment where you have to put in a ton of time and energy into it

 

[TheGhost]

Everything doesn't have to be super hardcore challenging. In fact this probably would have tanked the scores.

 

[Deleted member 58846]

No

 

[ket]

Nope

 

[ObijuanBronobi]

I'm playing on Survivor and the first sections are absolutely brutal when it comes to ammo or any other kind of resources. The truth is, resources have an RNG factor when it comes to it. I literally cleared the first 3/4 chapters in the game with no health and 3 bullets because I'd scavenge a bunch of one material instead of a ton of different resources to actually craft something. I turned down the Resource slider to hard and now I find a lot more stuff, while everything else still set to survivor. Now I'm starting to feel it's a bit imbalanced, like the game just got a ton easier because I can actually make stuff now as opposed to not making anything before.

I'm not a fan of artificial difficulty for the sake of it. The enemy AI in this game is brilliant, the game is hard on survivor since you will likely die in 1-2 shots (you can be head shot) and they try really hard to flank you. Also enemies don't just take the same paths all the time which, while brilliant from a tech perspective, is a little frustrating in a stealth based game. Like you're going to die 1-2 times to find out the layout of the encounter space and how many enemies there are, but if the enemies do different shit every time that goes out the window I think. I see gifs of the gameplay and you can see how much time was spent on the animations to shooting and the different options afforded to you take advantage of them. If you're playing on survivor, its very likely you won't be utilizing most of this to it's full extent, so I don't necessarily agree with the "Survivor or Bust" line of thinking.

Also side thing here, but I don't get all this ammo scarcity in the first place. I get it's a post apocalyptic world and all that, but if I'm going patrolling for zombie people, I'm taking belts of ammo with me. Ellie had 3 bullets to her name when she left, that's crazy.

 

[DavidDesu]

I'd probably have not completed TLOU1 if this was forced. I had a terrible time at that very final part that I actually only completed the game weeks or months later. I would have hated the experience because some parts on normal were still pretty difficult. It would have totally soured me on the whole thing. There's nothing wrong with options. You're enjoying it playing it your way, and I'm enjoying playing it mine.

I absolutely love the sliders for different elements, every game should have that. On my second play through I'm going to stick enemy AI right up but also make sure I get enough ammo to deal with them, I hate when choosing easy means everything becomes dumb, and hard means basically you get no supplies and it is near impossible. These options are amazing and should be applauded.