Current Events > Why do critics love The Last of Us 2 but players hate it?

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/the-last-of-us-part-ii

95 by critics, 3.4 by users... Is it just people trolling? Or is this game like "Oscar bait", but for games?

Some of it is review bombing, and some of the critics were clearly bought off.

---

Imagine using metacritic 'user score' average seriously. Even more so imagine one that is being actively review bombed by #Gamers.

---

Error1355 posted...

Imagine using metacritic 'user score' average seriously. Even more so imagine one that is being actively review bombed by #Gamers.

I know nothing about this. What is better than MetaCritic? And why is it being review bombed?

Game critics will pretty much never give a AAA release from a major company a bad or even average review for fear of not getting future review copies for doing so. All they care about is the clicks, and you can't get clicks if you can't get a review out faster than everyone else.

---

Because Joel was the greatest heroic character in gaming.

---

I don't think there is a more useless gauge on a something than Metacritic user scores.

---

I would guess these factors:

1. The review economy is fucked up and everything is way higher scored than they should be
2. These reviewers are probably pressured to give really high scores to big titles like this from major devs
3. Consumers are pissed about their handling of the delay
4. People who think every sex scene in media should have perfect bodies and be pornographically directed are pissed
5. Trolls
6. People who think any gay character in media is an attack on their heterosexuality are pissed
7. People who loved the first game are pissed because this one is apparently not nearly as good

I dunno man

Heard it sucks lmao
---

Because gamers are upset the main characters appear to be a lesbian and a muscular woman

no JO material for them so they get cranky

---

Players haven't played it. At least 90% of those reviews are by people who didn't play it and never planned to, and were sicced on it by /v/ or some alt right youtuber like The Quarterpounder

---

Timohtep posted...

I would guess these factors:

1. The review economy is fucked up and everything is way higher scored than they should be
2. These reviewers are probably pressured to give really high scores to big titles like this from major devs
3. Consumers are pissed about their handling of the delay
4. People who think every sex scene in media should have perfect bodies and be pornographically directed are pissed
5. Trolls
6. People who think any gay character in media is an attack on their heterosexuality are pissed
7. People who loved the first game are pissed because this one is apparently not nearly as good

I dunno man

Heard it sucks lmao

This. Its a perfect storm of butthurt man children and some actual problems. I can't wait for like 2 years from now when TLOU2 is considered a great game and all the people picking it up late will be like "why does this have such **** reviews?"

It's kinda weird cause I've watched a few people play it for a little and it looks like a solid game overall and then I come online and see this massive hate for it and I don't understand. Like no, the story wasn't perfect at all and was a little weird at times but it's definitely not the worst games of all time and definitely had some really good moments.

---

NoMeLx22x posted...

It's kinda weird cause I've watched a few people play it for a little and it looks like a solid game overall and then I come online and see this massive hate for it and I don't understand. Like no, the story wasn't perfect at all and was a little weird at times but it's definitely not the worst games of all time and definitely had some really good moments.

A lot of people are mad at the high critic review scores for those reasons basically. Though never really understood the gameplay is mostly the same complaint. Why do people want sequels to be nothing at all like the rest of the series?

---

I can't think of a """cinematic""" game that's gotten bad reviews.

Game journalist fawn over that shit because they think it legitimizes their career choice and basically makes them film critics. Even though it's essentially just a shitty walking dead episode that makes you pick up a controller occasionally so they can charge $60 for it.

Proto_Spark posted...

This. Its a perfect storm of butthurt man children and some actual problems. I can't wait for like 2 years from now when TLOU2 is considered a great game and all the people picking it up late will be like "why does this have such **** reviews?"

Its an OK game, but its not amazing. It without a doubt plays some shit up for woke points. And the gameplay it self is very slow and not really worth replaying IMO. Just like the first one, its a one and done. 8/10 tops.

---

Timohtep posted...

I would guess these factors:

1. The review economy is fucked up and everything is way higher scored than they should be
2. These reviewers are probably pressured to give really high scores to big titles like this from major devs
3. Consumers are pissed about their handling of the delay
4. People who think every sex scene in media should have perfect bodies and be pornographically directed are pissed
5. Trolls
6. People who think any gay character in media is an attack on their heterosexuality are pissed
7. People who loved the first game are pissed because this one is apparently not nearly as good

I dunno man

Heard it sucks lmao

This is a pretty accurate take. There are a wide variety of reasons people are hating on the game, some legitimate, most not.

---

I don't know how the game to most people, it could really suck for them. However right when the game came out people were posing reviews and talking about things that they could not have gotten to yet, but were in the leaks. So it clear that there was a lot of review bombing.

Spoilers...

For those who really dislike it could be how they killed Joel. I didn't like Joel and felt that if he met his end it would be good story telling. But just the way that they did it. Wow I would not want that to happen to my less favorite villain.


---

Homophobic/Transphobic/anti-SJWs review bombing for the most part on the gamer's end.

---

Strider102 posted...

Because Joel was the greatest heroic character in gaming.

Naw, he was just another angry white protagonist. I liked somethings about him, but he had that shit coming.

---

Valorant is another game that is highly rated well with critics but got reviewed bomb to oblivion from gamers as well (until they cleaned it up).

---

Godnorgosh posted...

From what I've heard the actual gameplay is great and arguably better than in the first game. Anyone saying TLoU II is bad because of the story alone is whack, gameplay is always by far the most important thing in a game.

Usually I would agree but I don't think I ever heard anyone praise the first game for its gameplay over its story. Everything I read or heard was that the story in the first was incredible and the bulk of the experience. If that's the case I feel like it's pretty fair to judge its successor very heavily on the quality of the story

But tbh I did not play the first and have no interest in doing so. So I'm talking on what I think I heard about the first one lmao
---

Players are not hating it they are playing it and are too busy to review it right now. The consensus by many players who finished it is it's a good game with a horrible story.

---

cjsdowg posted...

I don't know how the game to most people, it could really suck for them. However right when the game came out people were posing reviews and talking about things that they could not have gotten to yet, but were in the leaks. So it clear that there was a lot of review bombing.

Spoilers...

For those who really dislike it could be how they killed Joel. I didn't like Joel and felt that if he met his end it would be good story telling. But just the way that they did it. Wow I would not want that to happen to my less favorite villain.

The way Joel died was a bit anticlimatic but fairly realistic. Not all heroes die honorable, grandiose deaths.

---

Prestoff posted...

Valorant is another game that is highly rated well with critics but got reviewed bomb to oblivion from gamers as well (until they cleaned it up).

Valorant, the game with horrible anti cheat software right?

---

cjsdowg posted...

I don't know how the game to most people, it could really suck for them. However right when the game came out people were posing reviews and talking about things that they could not have gotten to yet, but were in the leaks. So it clear that there was a lot of review bombing.

Spoilers...

For those who really dislike it could be how they killed Joel. I didn't like Joel and felt that if he met his end it would be good story telling. But just the way that they did it. Wow I would not want that to happen to my less favorite villain.

From the negative reviews I've read almost every one of them is about the game being "SJW trash" or how Joel dies. Not that any of it matters to me, I'm not going to play the game because I don't enjoy story driven games.

Number090684 posted...

The way Joel died was a bit anticlimatic but fairly realistic. Not all heroes die honorable, grandiose deaths.

He's also not a hero so...

---

Number090684 posted...

Naw, he was just another angry white protagonist. I liked somethings about him, but he had that shit coming.

Anyone who thinks Joel was a hero is missing the point. He isn't some evil villain or the worst person in the game, but he's just a dude who did a lot of things for himself in a cruel, dead world Good character, but not a hero.

---

Timohtep posted...

The review economy is fucked up and everything is way higher scored than they should be

This is mythical. Games fit the score system. The score system doesn't fit the games. You can't just declare that the average game is a 5/10 or whatever because that requires a definition of what the hell the average game is, across all genres, price points, etc.

Timohtep posted...

These reviewers are probably pressured to give really high scores to big titles like this from major devs

Like Mass Effect Andromeda, Death Stranding, Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 3 Remake, etc etc etc, right? Actually, this idea that Naughty Dog has the budget to pay dozens of outlets for perfect scores when others don't, is mostly baseless.Turns out, good studios like Nintendo, Naughty Dog and Rockstar with good human capital, make good games.

Timohtep posted...

Consumers are pissed about their handling of the delay

You know this has nothing to do with these scores...

The rest is true, although for number 7, again, the number of people giving this fair 0s on Metacritic is proportionally insignificant. What's going on right now is equivalent to people reading the synopsis of 1984 on Wikipedia and thinking that qualifies them to give an informed rated review on GoodReads.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Anyone who thinks Joel was a hero is missing the point. He isn't some evil villain or the worst person in the game, but he's just a dude who did a lot of things for himself in a cruel, dead world Good character, but not a hero.

This. Joel was a really selfish, ****y character, but not anything particularly special in the world of TLOU. Hell, the entire point of the ending of TLOU is that he has a super toxic relationship with Ellie which also drives Ellie's actions in TLOU2.

EDIT: Also a fun fact, you can check other reviews people have made on Metacritic, and so far, most of the people review bombing TLOU2 haven't posted any other reviews. That doesn't exactly say they don't have merit, but it does help support the "really just upset over SJW stuff or something" argument.

LightHawKnight posted...

Valorant, the game with horrible anti cheat software right?

Yeah, but the main reason it got reviewed bombed was because of the way Riot Games handled the marketing. It forced people to watch paid streamers to get a beta key which artificially jacked up the viewer count for it on twitch. I would say it's in the same vain that people think Critics are getting paid to give good reviews to TLOU2.

---

Doe posted...

Timohtep posted...

The review economy is fucked up and everything is way higher scored than they should be

This is mythical. Games fit the score system. The score system doesn't fit the games. You can't just declare that the average game is a 5/10 or whatever because that requires a definition of what the hell the average game is, across all genres, price points, etc.

Timohtep posted...

These reviewers are probably pressured to give really high scores to big titles like this from major devs

Like Mass Effect Andromeda, Death Stranding, Kingdom Hearts 3, Resident Evil 3 Remake, etc etc etc, right? Actually, this idea that Naughty Dog has the budget to pay dozens of outlets for perfect scores when others don't, is mostly baseless.Turns out, good studios like Nintendo, Naughty Dog and Rockstar with good human capital, make good games.

Timohtep posted...

Consumers are pissed about their handling of the delay

You know this has nothing to do with these scores...

The rest is true, although for number 7, again, the number of people giving this fair 0s on Metacritic is proportionally insignificant. What's going on right now is equivalent to people reading the synopsis of 1984 on Wikipedia and thinking that qualifies them to give an informed rated review on GoodReads.

I've read practically nothing in depth about this situation at all, I'm just throwing out guesses lmao. I even said the following sentences in that very post:
"I would guess"
"I dunno man"
"heard it sucks"


---

hockeybub89 posted...

Anyone who thinks Joel was a hero is missing the point. He isn't some evil villain or the worst person in the game, but he's just a dude who did a lot of things for himself in a cruel, dead world Good character, but not a hero.

I didn't think Joel was a hero exactly, but he was technically the protagonist of the first game, and one man's monster is another man's hero. While it can be debated if Joel was good or evil, it seemed like he had softened over the years and became less selfish, especially considering him selflessly helping someone is what got him exposed and killed.

---

Prestoff posted...

Yeah, but the main reason it got reviewed bombed was because of the way Riot Games handled the marketing. It forced people to watch paid streamers to get a beta key which artificially jacked up the viewer count for it on twitch. I would say it's in the same vain that people think Critics are getting paid to give good reviews to TLOU2.

Not to mention that most of the biggest Valorant streamers didn't have to do any work and just ran 24/7 VOD streams to farm bits, subs, and donations from people who thought they'd have higher chances from donating.

---

I didn't mean to sound like attacking you if I did, I just wanted to respond to those points because they're brought up often and worth responding to.

---

hockeybub89 posted...

Anyone who thinks Joel was a hero is missing the point. He isn't some evil villain or the worst person in the game, but he's just a dude who did a lot of things for himself in a cruel, dead world Good character, but not a hero.

Yeah I agree, however my problem is how far the sequel went with it. Joel was a complex character. He did bad things and wasn't a hero but we became invested in him and those terrible acts happen as the story progresses.

With Abby there is none of that. She is a down right villain sue who we play after she performs her worst actions. Attempts to make her more sympathetic come too late.

I have no problem with dark hopeless stories and characters who have to do terrible things but there are right and wrong ways to do it.

---

Doe posted...

I didn't mean to sound like attacking you if I did, I just wanted to respond to those points because they're brought up often and worth responding to.

Yeah, fair

My b
---

Yeah Joel is not a "good guy" character, so anyone calling him a saint or a hero clearly hasn't played the first game (he does a lot of twisted up shit), but I understand why people would have issue the way they handled him in the sequel. The first game does a good job making you care for both Joel and Ellie, so to see your character get handled in such a way does kind of suck but I get that not all characters get to die in a grandiose kind of way, sometimes people get the literal short end of a golf club ;)

---

LightHawKnight posted...

and some of the critics were clearly bought off.

Is there any indication this is more true than any other triple A game?

---

rant:

i think a lot of game reviewers get a huge boner every time a game comes along that tries to be cinematic & profound. these types are desperate for games to get elevated to the same status as movies/tv shows/books, aka art for the masses, instead of being this more exclusive hobby that pretty much only "gamers" enjoy separately. like right now there are a lot of people that will watch the hottest HBO show or read a NYT bestseller interchangeably, but I don't think there is a large amount of people who consume video games the same way.

so when something like TLOU2 comes out it's getting 10s across the board because it checks the boxes of what these people ultimately are looking for: cinematic, dark & mature (shakes off the juvenile stigma games have), realistic, good acting, etc.

i can guarantee you as TLOU2 sinks in more you're going to have more reviews trickling out from gamer types instead of games journalists and they will be a lot more critical. these reviews will dig into level design and pacing and combat and all that stuff, they'll review the game from a gamer perspective that journalists desperately want to avoid.

as for the user reviews, i think by and large it's childish whining and edgy teens being edgy. but they bring to light something interesting, the transactional nature of video games. Character X (you know who I am talking about) dies early on, and there are a lot of people mad about that, and it feels like there is almost an entitlement from a consumer perspective that the fans get the satisfaction they want instead of just experiencing a new story. they paid for this game so X has to go out in a way they want. if games are going to be taken seriously as art, they have to distance away from this mindset, but it's hard to do that when you ultimately want your playerbase to have fun with the game and stay engaged for 25 hours.

---

Romulox28 posted...

so when something like TLOU2 comes out it's getting 10s across the board because it checks the boxes of what these people ultimately are looking for: cinematic, dark & mature (shakes off the juvenile stigma games have), realistic, good acting, etc.

Why didn't this happen for Death Stranding

---

Romulox28 posted...

but I don't think there is a large amount of people who consume video games the same way.

Well the barrier to entry for playing a game is a lot higher than to watch something on TV or read a book.

Rikiaz posted...

Not to mention that most of the biggest Valorant streamers didn't have to do any work and just ran 24/7 VOD streams to farm bits, subs, and donations from people who thought they'd have higher chances from donating.

Not to mention it was reported that it took some people at minimum 10hrs to get the beta key (I was one of those), but for some others it took a total of 40hrs before they got one. The game is fun, but it was clear that some of these twitch streamers that were paid to play Valorant were not having a good time with it and was forced to play it either because of contractual reasons or because they saw a huge surge of subscriptions, bits, and donations (because for like how you said it, thought it would increase the chances on landing those keys).

---

Number090684 posted...

Naw, he was just another angry white protagonist. I liked somethings about him, but he had that shit coming.

Don't say that on TLoU2's board. One of the criticisms is that Joel deserved an honorable heroic death and that he went out like a bitch.

Problem with this is, number 1 he was far from a hero. Him and Tommy literally set traps and ambushes along with others to murder unsuspecting survivors and steal whatever they had on them. Now sure, an argument could be made they did what they did to survive. But that doesn't excuse the shit they did. Number 2 if anything Joel went out in a great way. He didn't beg for mercy, he didn't cry. He straight up tells Abby not to make a speech and get it over with.

I understand getting attached to and liking a character. It's understandable seeing as how we spend a whole game with him.

Another argument could be made that he doomed humanity as a whole when he took out the Fireflies as they were the best equipped to actually make a cure. Though, at the same time there's no guarantee a cure was even possible and even if it was the Fireflies would have been anything but noble with it.

---

keep in mind: most critics have actually played it, most people review bombing haven't.

I'm like 5 hours in, so far I'm agreeing with the people who have played

---

Strider102 posted...

Another argument could be made that he doomed humanity as a whole when he took out the Fireflies as they were the best equipped to actually make a cure. Though, at the same time there's no guarantee a cure was even possible and even if it was the Fireflies would have been anything but noble with it.

You could also argue that The Fireflies didn't have the slightest idea what they were doing. From the first time you meet Marlene being her nearly dead, to every Firefly outpost you get to being abandoned, to jumping right to fatal brain surgery the second they got Ellie, or that guy at the lab who was stupid enough to let the infected monkeys out and turn him.

hockeybub89 posted...

I don't think there is a more useless gauge on a something than Metacritic user scores.

Sure there is. The Metacritic review scores. Review scores in general, as well.

I actually now take the opposite of an "official" review score to be the probable actual quality.

---

Proto_Spark posted...

You could also argue that The Fireflies didn't have the slightest idea what they were doing. From the first time you meet Marlene being her nearly dead, to every Firefly outpost you get to being abandoned, to jumping right to fatal brain surgery the second they got Ellie, or that guy at the lab who was stupid enough to let the infected monkeys out and turn him.

I mostly just meant as far as equipment and doctors were concerned, but yeah this is true.

---

Proto_Spark posted...

You could also argue that The Fireflies didn't have the slightest idea what they were doing. From the first time you meet Marlene being her nearly dead, to every Firefly outpost you get to being abandoned, to jumping right to fatal brain surgery the second they got Ellie, or that guy at the lab who was stupid enough to let the infected monkeys out and turn him.

And also on top of that if Ellie is the only immune person in the world it seems like an incredibly bad idea to kill her, the only source of immunity. Joel may have done what he did for the wrong reasons but I agree with his choice at the end of TLoU

---

It has six times as many reviews as Final Fantasy XV, Grand Theft Auto V or Pokemon Sword, and 5x as many as Mario Odyssey. Nearly twice as many as Breath of the Wild. It doesn't matter if they're review bombing it for this or that reason, they do not reflect the usual flow of users that rate games on the site, and this is thus an inaccurate assessment of the game's actual reception.

---

The reaction to stuff like this and TLJ just underscores how out of step I am with where the internet is

I just can't wrap my head around the sheer vitriol and hate

---