"The Last of Us" has become an acclaimed game due to its story, memorable characters, and post-apocalyptic world. With the release of two sucessful games, many fans are anticipating a potential third part. However, with this, comes the question: is a part 3 of The Last of Us really necessary?
By exploring the potential direction of the game series, it is important to consider the implications of continuing the story. Has the narrative reached a natural conclusion or is there still more to be told? A part 3 could provide an opportunity to expand upon the world and characters established in the previous games, while also resolving any lingering questions or story arcs.
At the same time, there are valid concerns about the potential risks of a third part. How might a part 3 change the established lore or character dynamics? Could it detract from the impact of the previous games or damage the series forever?
In this article, we could explore the pros and cons of a part 3 of The Last of Us, considering both the potential benefits and drawbacks of continuing the story. Discuss the ways in which a third part could expand the world and characters of the previous games, as well as the potential risks that must be avoided to preserve the integrity of the series.
Good concept but execute the question with more clarity. Specify "series forever," "continuing history," "what potential direction," and what expansion would you like the writer to discuss? – Montayj7911 months ago
Within the last two years we have received two horror video game inspired TV adaptations, one that was a smash hit, and one that flew under the radar. Neither of these shows stuck 100% to the source material so what made The Last of Us succeed and Resident Evil fail?
I don't think this is the place for an opinion piece, but you could still approach the topic from the perspective of the overall necessity of adaptations or the art of adaptation. Something more objective but focused. I hope that helps. – Leo Panasyuk12 months ago
Recently, The Last Last of Us Part II won Game of the Year, while, last June, a few weeks before the official release, journalists and critics praised it highly. On Metacritic, critics score is high: 93/100.
However, the user review is way less eulogistic: only 5.7/10, with almost as many negative critics than positive ones: about 35 000, against about 36 000. (As a comparison, there are no negative critics among the critics’ reviews.). It is also worth noting that, on both sides, there are relatively few mixed critics: around 4 000 for users and 8 for critics.
The Last of Us II is, then, a very polarizing and cleaving game. But why is that?
Critics and players almost unanimously praised the graphics and the technical aspects of the game. The divide seems to lies with the narrative and the storytelling of the game. To some, this new opus made bold choices, cleverly subverted expectations, and carried powerful messages. To others, it utterly betrayed the first game and is filled with character inconsistencies and clumsy shortcuts.
How can we, then, explain the gap between those two antagonistic standpoints?
(To do so, one may examine the different plot tricks, gaming devices, or filming effects the game uses, more or less subtly, and the emotional and psychological reactions it is supposed to have on the audience. Plus, as one of the bones of contention is Abby’s character and her narrative arc, empathy is one of the meta-themes of the game: what kind of empathy characters in the game may or may not build towards each other, but, more prominently, what type of empathy a player may or may not develop towards such and such character. Indeed, at least three different kinds of empathies may be at play in the game: emotional empathy, cognitive empathy, and rational empathy or compassion. The kind of empathy one may develop, or, on the contrary, loose, towards such or such character can influence their appreciation regarding the game.)
I'm a huge fan of TLoU. The second game was honestly more fun/difficult for me to play, based on the gameplay functions, amped up horror, and graphics. Although, the narrative was a massive disappointment. I think one of the main topics to discuss, would be that the audience never really wanted to get to know Abby. She was barely connected to the first game, and she quickly kills Joel. Why give a random antagonist any attention at all? The fans fell in love with Ellie and Joel's relationship. Making the new game about Abby and Ellie took away from everything that made the game special in the first place. – RaeganSmith3 years ago
I think an interesting thing to separate here would be critics VS online communities because every review I've read has been wholly positive. And also, any friend I've spoken to has been the same. All the complaints seem to come from people benefitting from anonymity. – Marcus Dean3 years ago
With the announcement of The Last of Us: Part 2, there’s been a spur of excitement in the gaming world. This topic would explore the differences and similarities between The Last of Us and other survival-horror/zombie games, and what aspects made it become such a household title among gamers. What did it do differently, what didn’t it change, and how did the narrative affect audiences and players? In essence, what made The Last of Us so memorable to players, and what new avenues did it open for its genre? (The author who takes this topic may even wait for Part 2 to release and add a comparative section between both games, adding to how Part 2 affected the gaming community as well as its predecessor).
The Last of Us is a game that has touched so many people, and can definitely make the case as to why video games should be considered an art form. You should explore why The Last of Us does that, and explain how the second can improve on the first one. – cbo10947 years ago
TLOU is different from the regular cliched zombie game because it focuses on the characters and their relationship, not on the zombies. The zombies and the setting are merely backdrops to Joel and Ellie. If this were simply a story about Joel and Ellie and their relationship, and the zombies were taken out entirely, I think it still would've been just as good of a game. I could go on and on about why this game is amazing and why Naughty Dog is one of the best developers out there, but I think that's the gist of it. Telltale's "The Walking Dead" (especially season 1) is the same way. I cried like a baby at the end of that one. I couldn't care less about the zombies. I just wanted Lee and Clementine! – Christina6 years ago