The Last of Us 2 - Two cowgirls murdering each other's loved ones

Reviewers were paid off with mental brain bucks fed by their ideological goggles. Oh this has trans people in it and a strong male character gets killed. "I don't know if I can forgive you for making me live FAKE DAD!"

The first one was getting in the stronk female territory with that one chick that gets killed. Everyone should have seen it coming after lesbian romance was the key feature of the DLC. The only thing surprising out of this whole mess is people being surprised by the whole mess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are other ways to "pay a reviewer off" that doesn't have to be a bag of moolah. Review copies in general. Ad's on their websites. Access to the publisher/developer for future interviews or previews. Hell, goodie bags. Paid trips. Hell, any critic that accepted the review copies with the embargo's limitations was paid off right then and there. They're not reviewing the game proper. They're mouthpieces to sell the game for Naughty Dog.
 
Last edited:
The same way the regular media is not telling the news they are selling the news.
 
Reviewers were paid off with mental brain bucks fed by their ideological goggles.
This and their peers and close followers applaud their reviews. I do find the notion that they are being paid off with money a bit ridiculous. More than a few ex-reviewers with grudges would probably come out with hard proof of such things if this was true. And the access limitation being a motivator for reviews that aren't cruel? I think that's probably an issue but not like the common gamer thinks it is. Even if it was, do you think they'd be pushed so hard to get a game 94 or above? No, it'd probably be a minimum of like 75 or 80.

Hell, goodie bags. Paid trips. Hell, any critic that accepted the review copies with the embargo's limitations was paid off right then and there.
This is a more reasonable assessment because this definitely happens. I've heard reviewers saying they received free shit and a sweet trip out to try out the game or whatever.
But I don't think that Sony would stop sending out review copies to you if you gave one of their games an 82 instead of a 96. Reviews don't even really sway sales. It's pointless to push a reviewer so hard. I think more of it is the, "I'm trying to impress my close followers and peer reviewers with my super cool review about a story driven game." And that's how you end up getting people comparing TLOU2 to fucking Schindler's List which is absurd.
 
Reviews don't even really sway sales.
That kind of doesn't explain why the reviewers that got review copies from before the game's release were told by Sony to basically only review half of the game. Yeah, only review half of the game.

If reviews didn't sway sales, i don't think they would be doing such a thing.
 
There's not much to say it really affects the sales of that particular game. I think it helps more so in the way that if you bought a game, and everyone thumbs upped it, you're more likely to not hate it as much and more likely to pay attention to the next game like it or in that series.

Battlefront II reviewed at a high of 68 and low of 65 on the Critic portion of Metacritic, the user reviews are 1.3, 1.4. and 1.4. The game sold 9 million copies in three months and EA was expecting 10. That was a huge controversy. That wasn't just gamers being mad about something. That was a game that a lot of very casual folk buy because they love Star Wars. Mass Effect Andromeda got slammed pretty hard for a game of its popularity too and still according to EA, sold well and had great player engagement (whatever the fuck that means). TLOU 2 leaks also barely influenced preorders for the game.

The point is, sure some big review might influence people that are more involved with games on a daily basis even when they aren't playing them but a bad review of a game is only going to deter those who are watching reviews as they come and discussing games fairly often when they aren't playing them. I know plenty of people that are just aren't involved in talking about games. They don't give a fuck what reviews say. The game is exposed to them via ad or word of mouth (usually the best influence a review has on sales is word of mouth it seems) and they normally decide whether or not they're interested and wanting to buy it then and there. TLOU 2 leaks only affected people who are on forums or Discords talking about game news or that have that kinda news in their social media feeds. Plenty of people I know that buy new games don't have time for that. They work overtime, they have a family, they have a house to tend to, and their free time relating to video games is playing them seeing as they might have 4-8 hours a week to play games. They don't want to spend 4 of their 8 hours a week they get to play games on people talking about games and arguing about them. That's a huge portion of sales. As are kids, who usually are none the wiser to bad or good reviews. I didn't read reviews as a kid. I had friends tell me about games. I read the back of boxes. These kids see super cool space man and they'll buy the next Mass Effect or at least ask for it at Christmas.

If a game getting good reviews really affects sales, it's not enough that I could imagine Sony paying all these outlets to give it a 94+. I just can't see it knowing what I've already seen between scores and sales. It just doesn't seem that logical to spend a lot of money on reviews to have it influence a few people. Most people, in my opinion, that are heavily involved with the current happenings of game news and game design and so on are also way more opinionated than your average buyer. The average buyer just needs a bit of excitement, some good looking graphics and they're more than likely sold. They don't hold games under a critical lens. I've pissed a fair few people off in real life because they wanted to know my opinion on Fallout 4 and other games and I'm just like yeah man they fucking suck. And their opinion? It's not New Vegas but it's damn near close in how good it is.

I'm sure that even something like Fallout 76 couldn't have been saved by 90+ review scores. People were immediately upset when they saw that, the general public largely didn't care for such a thing.

EDIT: Looked up a study (haven't fully read it yet) done on some really unknown games and the user review and critic review biasing it had on people. Seems that despite the type of review (critic or user), it definitely had an impact on whether or not a player liked their experience with a game. Mostly that players that read negative reviews showed a larger bias shift than those who read positive ones. Example: Read review that said 50/100 and gave the game a 25/100 vs. Read review that said 80/100 and gave the game a 83/100. Something like that. But that also comes into question of whether or not reading a review or review score would affect the decision of purchase, how many purchasers read the reviews, do the final scores matter more than the text of the review or vice versa, how does controversy play a part, etc.
 
Last edited:
I had a hard time fighting off the negative impressions of all the people that said Death Stranding was boring shit. Even when I was having fun I kept hearing everyone say "boring" in my head while playing it. It was quite annoying especially while having fun. I ended up liking it more than any other game released the past few years. Boring shit.
 
Reviewers were paid off with mental brain bucks fed by their ideological goggles. Oh this has trans people in it and a strong male character gets killed. "I don't know if I can forgive you for making me live FAKE DAD!"

Oh horseshit.

Joel being a "strong male character" who dies is nothing anyone would have given a shit about if there wasn't a trans character in this (and he's a minor character).

* Harry Mason
* John Marston
* Arthur Morgan
* The Lone Wanderer (before the DLC)
* Commander Shepherd
* Noble Six
* Lee from the Walking Dead
* Starkiller
* Almost the entire cast of Modern Warfare (all men)
* Booker, who is basically Joel anyway, depending on how you interpret the ending


Video games fucking love to kill the protagonist.
 
Oh horseshit.

Joel being a "strong male character" who dies is nothing anyone would have given a shit about if there wasn't a trans character in this (and he's a minor character).

* Harry Mason
* John Marston
* Arthur Morgan
* The Lone Wanderer (before the DLC)
* Commander Shepherd
* Noble Six
* Lee from the Walking Dead
* Starkiller

Video games fucking love to kill the protagonist.

Do they kill the protagonist by some weirdo that has tits and a cock? Did Lee from Walking Dead get killed by a tranny? You compare games that let their heroes go out in style instead of degraded by some retarded character just for the lulz, just so writers like you can fap over how progressive it all is. All you have to do is look at the cover of your superhero books to see you fall right in line with the people that enjoy SJW trash like Last of Us 2. Is it really the trans person?

Funny I thought it was because the main character is a bitch. Just seeing how she acted like a stuck up little teenage bitch towards Joel made me hate the game before I knew anything about it.

Imagine instead of getting killed by Doomsday if Superman was killed by transgender Lois Lane.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joel died because he got soft in a world that rewarded being a selfish, cutthroat killer. Abbie looks how I imagine a chick would look in an environment like TLOU2 - and she kept up with Golf (great form on that swing).

The game's marketing is deceptive as hell, though. All that shit with Joel leads people to believe it's going to be the greatest parent-child duo since God of War.

God of War has you embarking on this epic journey where this gruff, old, bearded guy warms up to his son without sacrificing anything from his character - he'll still skull fuck people in a heartbeat for getting in his way. You stomp Draugrs into dust. You mercilessly throw Dark Elf spears at their own wielder. The whole story is centralized around two characters bonding in this awful world where Gods are the most magnanimous pieces of shit ever.

TLOU2 has you embarking on this completely lame journey where you are lectured to by a vegan about the moral conundrum of killing while having absolutely no agency or influence over said killing. I didn't want to kill that dog but you made me do it in some stupid QTE cutscene. I am bashing this person's head in because killing is bad and you need to understand that. This is all in service of an ending that is worse than the fake ending from the leak. 500 needless deaths later and in the finale she decides that in THIS moment she will no longer kill because it is a vicious cycle.

So profound. Truly an intellectual's handbook.
 
If the story is anything like this, then I'd totally play it.

 
I'm surprised that this game isn't banned in Alabama yet.

It is banned in the middle east however.
 
The amusing thing is that many of the streamers who played the game have given it a pretty fair score, usually a 6/10. It's pretty much only the gameplay that gives them the saving grace of not giving it a lower score. But for some reason these streamers' opinions on the game keep getting thrown out in favor of Metacritic reviews that essentially consist of "Amazing game, great job Naughty Dog!".

Yeah, I should believe those faceless people over Pewdiepie, AvoidingthePuddle, Angry Joe, Critikal or that ex-reviewer who released that video two weeks ago, all of who that disliked TLOU2 immensely and actually played from start to finish.
 
A Japanese player who hated the game said it best about TLoU2: "It's a story about right and wrong by people who say that they are always right."
This game is hated in Asia by the way:
 
What American videogames do Asian people like anyways that don't say "Craft" in them?
 
Back
Top