3 Things I Want From The Last of Us Part II

"The Last of Us is my favorite game of all time. It hit all the right notes when it came to story, characters, and gameplay throughout an emotional journey of a man and an adolescent girl trekking across the U.S. It’s an emotional roller-coaster the whole way — a daunting, and unforgettable experience. Anyway, you know all of this, unless you’ve been under a rock since 2013. Now, The Last of Us Part II is coming — while we don’t know much about it, I can’t help but wonder what’s next for Joel and Ellie. Here’s three things I want from The Last of Us Part II." -- PlayStation Enthusiast

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
544d ago
OB1Biker544d ago (Edited 544d ago )

I think we ll get a very different gameplay with Ellie and that's great to renew the interest in the way you play.
Story wise, and probably many wouldn't agree, I would like a more pronounced statement from Neil on how he views right and wrong etc.
In TLOU it was more left to the players to figure out themselves and think about it. It was awesome but part II logically could have a different approach.
I know Ellie s song is all about 'I can't walk on the path of the right because I'm wrong' but its precisely interesting to answer that.
Also selfishly I'd like Neil to demonstrate the fireflies are @ssholes haha

joethetimelord543d ago

I feel the gameplay will be fundamentally similar to the first game, while adding several features and polishing up what we're familiar with. The real differences will likely be in what you end up doing with those mechanics. Part 1 was about surviving and getting by, with or without killing; the point was protecting yourself and Ellie (and vice versa) which tied into the theme of love. Part 2, being specifically focused on hatred, could be a more aggressive experience overall.

OB1Biker543d ago

Neil said Ellie plays differently and he really was trying not to tell too much alluding to a gameplay reveal. I got the feeling there could be big changes. We lll see. Im sure it ll be great anyway.

Kornholic543d ago

A big part of what made The Last of Us so great was the moral ambiguity. I don't the developer to definite right and wrong, partly because that's imposing somebody else's ideas of moral on me but also because it's already predigested for the player. It's better left at the hands or the mind of the player because that way it provokes thought and introspection.

Shiken543d ago

I just want to play as Joel. I cannot get into games with a female lead, so I will pass on it.

I am sure the game will be great though.

joethetimelord543d ago

New enemies are practically a given considering the claw marks in that tree in the trailer.
Also bear in mind that there were several infected animal concepts, including an infected elephant, that were scrapped in part 1. As the world's getting more primal, infected animals would be a fitting gateway to a huge variety of enemies.

brettnll543d ago

Fighting an infected bear would be the scariest thing ever

mixelon543d ago

I wonder if they'd be all raged up or if they'd be more like clickers. The idea of an elephant using echolocation to get around is pretty hilarious.

Kurdishcurse543d ago

Sure as hell would be much more interesting than fighting boring infected
And non infected humans, i Got tired of that a few hours in.

I remember neil saying he wanted infected animals in the 1st game, but said it wouldnt be realistic, which is a dumb statement considering humans would be the last ones to be infected. Its almost like we have a thing called science and medicine or sumthin to atleast make us last. What a shock!

BlakHavoc543d ago

U have no idea what you're talking about

RevXM543d ago (Edited 543d ago )

Well we also have overuse of antibiotics, bad hygiene and habits and a big network of fast transportation between big populations across the globe.

Koalabears dont hang out or pass 70 000 Koalabears everyday and travel by air between big population across the world, and touch dirty hands and smartphones or like railings that 5 million others have touched since it was last cleaned, or go to the same place as everyone else to buy fruit that 900 people have their saliva on by touching and licking their fingers or sneezing or coughing. Humans arent as clean and neat and protected as you think. We are pretty gross.

Kurdishcurse540d ago (Edited 540d ago )

BlackHavoc I do. You are just too gullible and fanboyish to realize facts are facts. Im afraid your wrong with or without your agreement. Its ok to critisize the things you love kid. Next time elaborate more before embarrassing yourself like that.

Kurdishcurse540d ago (Edited 540d ago )

RevXM all that has almost nothing to do with the infection rate of fungus. In fact, the same type of fungus already works on many insects...not humans. Soooo neil already lost his argument before it started. Besides, fungus isnt exactly contagious. Its hard to get it just by touch. Even if it did, it would die fast since fungus needs certain climates to propagate.

Overuse of antibiotics wont make us that much more susciptable to mind control fungus dude, or any fungus. Having fur, moisture in climate, no meds and not much movement, no sunlight exposure(depends on fungus) and ohh you know... NO HANDS to correctly clean them with are the most contributing factors to fungul infections. Ever seen a bear try to skin himselr just to get some relief? I have.

"Humans arent as clean and neat and protected as you think. We are pretty gross." A bears daily routine is more sickening than all the things you mentioned combined.

Are you truly tryin to convince yourself that we are dirtier than animals? I dont know why ppl are arguing this. It is a fact that all animals with fur and no freakin soap are millions of times more susciptable to fungul infections. Just watch a vet treating animals and then with humans. Its gonna be pretty obvious why animals with fur have the highest chances of this, NOT HUMANS. This is a scientific fact. Ask any vet or doctor.

Neil drukkman is completely and undeniably wrong, and it seems to me he only said that to hide his laziness in enemy design and variety, Because he would be pretty dumb to believe humans would be the 1st to go in fungul apocalypse. Jeezuz christ naughty dog fans...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 540d ago
Z501543d ago (Edited 543d ago )

After Sarah dies. The games skips 20 years.What exactly happened during those 20 years?

I'm asking because, i had no motivation to do anything because i wasn't told what happened. I just didn't care.

'Find a cure' For what? I wasn't infected.
Til this day. I don't even know what the 'disease' is/was. At what point in the game is this explained? I didn't read any of the books/notes. *It's a survival game. Who stops to read when death is around the corner?

Well made game, but i was bored to death.

brettnll543d ago

I didn't think that hard about the virus haha. I loved TLOU 1.


OB1Biker543d ago (Edited 543d ago )


There r many 'clues' in the game and straight at the beginning as you control Sarah you can find a newspaper article about the infection

InKnight7s543d ago

Noooo sexual content plz, I dont give a shit about LGBT or whatever that even mean. Just hand something next level.

Show all comments (19)