Roger Ebert Dismisses The Last of Us: Naughty Dog Responds

Quote :

Veteran film critic, Roger Ebert; dismisses The Last of Us and other games as leaving nothing to the imagination.

Although those aren't his own words, Ebert seems to agree with an article Steven Boone wrote, titled " The Last of Us, and other video games that leave absolutely nothing to the imagination." You can view the tweet below.

Roger Ebert's view on film have made him one of the most celebrated and accomplished critics ever. He's been working on his craft for nearly 50 years now. His words, regardless if they are about film, carry a lot of weight. His views on video games haven't granted him as much praise as his opinion of film. He has become this sort of Ebenezer Scrooge of video games, despising everything they do. With this, people especially in the video game community take him less seriously.

Steven, may just know enough about the video game industry to get away with articles like this, but he didn't really explain how The Last of Us leaves nothing to our imaginations. It seems as if he didn't do any research on the game at all. He just watched the E3 demo and made up his mind then and there. Yes; The Last of Us is violent, but that doesn't mean that the story, characters, and player choice don't leave anything for our imaginations. In fact, most people who have followed this game since its reveal disagree with Boone. He didn't seem to understand Naughty Dog's motives with the game.

You can read his article here

Evan Wells, co-president of Naughty Dog and Neil Druckmann the creative director respond to Ebert's tweet and Steven's article with the following.
Evan Wells: "I've the utmost respect for @ebertchicago so I hope he takes another look @ #TheLastofUs b4 dismissing it. We're tying something different."
Neil Druckman: "Whoa... The Last of Us is being dismissed by @ebertchicago. That's a new milestone for us. #honored #thelastofus.

http://www.dualshocknexus.com/2012/06/roger-ebert-dismisses-last-of-us.html

Ebert and Boone are not wrong. The Last of Us DOESN'T leave anything to the imagination. The shocking violence was, indeed, the forefront of that E3 demo. I think games are behind film and literature in terms of subtle storytelling and, really, storytelling in general. I mean there's only so much you can do with the story that will also make the gameplay engaging, so yeah, it's hard to leave certain things to the imagination because we ARE the characters, and as such, are seeing the gruesome events through their eyes.

TheCinemaJack wrote:

Ebert and Boone are not wrong. The Last of Us DOESN'T leave anything to the imagination. The shocking violence was, indeed, the forefront of that E3 demo. I think games are behind film and literature in terms of subtle storytelling and, really, storytelling in general. I mean there's only so much you can do with the story that will also make the gameplay engaging, so yeah, it's hard to leave certain things to the imagination because we ARE the characters, and as such, are seeing the gruesome events through their eyes.

Yeah take the side of the guy who said "2009’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, the second highest-selling video game of all-time in the U.S., was in many ways the Dark Knight of gaming".

Even though I prefer movies over games, Ebert obviously doesn't know shit about gaming.

yonny616 wrote:

TheCinemaJack wrote:

Ebert and Boone are not wrong. The Last of Us DOESN'T leave anything to the imagination. The shocking violence was, indeed, the forefront of that E3 demo. I think games are behind film and literature in terms of subtle storytelling and, really, storytelling in general. I mean there's only so much you can do with the story that will also make the gameplay engaging, so yeah, it's hard to leave certain things to the imagination because we ARE the characters, and as such, are seeing the gruesome events through their eyes.

Yeah take the side of the guy who said "2009’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, the second highest-selling video game of all-time in the U.S., was in many ways the Dark Knight of gaming".

Yes, let's selectively read the article. He said it because it built upon an established franchise and also introduced serious themes into the mix, something you might not expect from such a type of game. Oh wait, what? The Dark Knight built upon an established franchise as well? Oh, and it also introduced kinds of themes not normally found in superhero films? Gee, I don't see the resemblance.

Mecha wrote:

Even though prefer movies over games, Ebert doesn't know shit about gaming.

He's not wrong about this, but I do disagree with his assertion that video games aren't art.

TheCinemaJack wrote:

Yes, let's selectively read the article. He said it because it built upon an established franchise and also introduced serious themes into the mix, something you might not expect from such a type of game. Oh wait, what? The Dark Knight built upon an established franchise as well? Oh, and it also introduced kinds of themes not normally found in superhero films? Gee, I don't see the resemblance.

Yeah I read that too, but comparing CoD to The Dark Knight (Which is one of the best films in comic book history) is ultimately an insult to gamers, movie goers and especially Nolan/Goyer who wrote an awesome plot. While MW2 has one of the stupidest plots in gaming.

How is it an insult? He wasn't comparing the quality of the storytelling. You just see Modern Warfare 2 in the same comparison as The Dark Knight and throw a hissyfit without even looking at the context of the comparison. It makes me think that you enjoy being angry.

Quote :

He wasn't comparing the quality of the storytelling

:ORLY: Then tell me what was he comparing them for? The theme? Cause that's part of storytelling. How it built on an established franchise? How do you do that? Oh yeah, through storytelling.

I think he was comparing the financial success of the two.

yonny616 wrote:

Quote :

He wasn't comparing the quality of the storytelling

Then tell me what was he comparing them for? The theme? Cause that's part of storytelling. How it built on an established franchise? How do you do that? Oh yeah, through storytelling.

Of course he was comparing the storytelling. He wasn't comparing the QUALITY. Nobody said that Modern Warfare 2 had as good a story as The Dark Knight. Selective reading, my friend.

TheCinemaJack wrote:

yonny616 wrote:

Quote :

He wasn't comparing the quality of the storytelling

Then tell me what was he comparing them for? The theme? Cause that's part of storytelling. How it built on an established franchise? How do you do that? Oh yeah, through storytelling.

Of course he was comparing the storytelling. He wasn't comparing the QUALITY. Nobody said that Modern Warfare 2 had as good a story as The Dark Knight. Selective reading, my friend.

So you're telling me he sat down and said "Modern Warfare 2 and The Dark Knight share this in common, so that must mean Modern Warfare 2 is The Dark Knight of gaming." :jackie:

TheCinemaJack wrote:

yonny616 wrote:

Yeah take the side of the guy who said "2009’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, the second highest-selling video game of all-time in the U.S., was in many ways the Dark Knight of gaming".

Yes, let's selectively read the article. He said it because it built upon an established franchise and also introduced serious themes into the mix, something you might not expect from such a type of game. Oh wait, what? The Dark Knight built upon an established franchise as well? Oh, and it also introduced kinds of themes not normally found in superhero films? Gee, I don't see the resemblance.

Well that just confirms everything I previously thought regards the two franchises.

That both COD 4 and Batman Begins were better than MW2 and The Dark Knight.

>2012
>Expecting imagination from a survival game

:fuckthat:

It focusses on the realism in the gameplay and a high narrative quality. Thats all it has to do.

We all know Ebert detest videogames, why he's even given in opinion the matter is irrelevant, just like he is to the videogame industry.

I don't think Roger Ebert detests video games. He just doesn't see them as art. And he's right this time in regards to imagination.

He probably doesn't know how to hold a controller so his opinion on games is null.

Y'all get so defensive about this. You truly are the crusaders of video gaming, the guardians of all that is good.

This maybe old, but it still has ground and covers a similar topic on hand here:



PS: These guys obviously only have knowledge from what they saw in the gameplay trailer. They don't know the relationship between Joel and Ellie, they don't know the other gameplay elements, (like how that whole action scene could have been averted if they player chose to, but for purposes of a trailer, they showed action to get people exited), they just saw "Ooh, pretty visuals and bloody action, yeah nothing new here". I respect Ebert and Boone, but these guys clearly don't understand video games and should do a little more research next time they open their mouths.

The Last of Us leaves the last of us speechless.

Mecha, is that you in your new avatar?

I wish. I would've been playing with myself all day long.