I wonder if this time the will release the game with the cut scene they somehow forgot to show us when they originally released the game. Y'know the one I'm talking about, right? The one where Joel fate was decided several years into the future by a little girl crying over the loss of her father, who was going to cut open a little girl for scientific experiments that were unjustified and unproven. That scene.

Loobyluggs:

I wonder if this time the will release the game with the cut scene they somehow forgot to show us when they originally released the game. Y'know the one I'm talking about, right? The one where Joel fate was decided several years into the future by a little girl crying over the loss of her father, who was going to cut open a little girl for scientific experiments that were unjustified and unproven. That scene.

It's possible.... although everything leads to this scene, one might argue one of the most beautiful scenes in all of video game history. [spoiler]https://i.imgur.com/ozJ9G3V.jpg[/spoiler]

The game is so demanding for 1080p 60 it recommends a never released card :O

Venix:

The game is so demanding for 1080p 60 it recommends a never released card :O

Well at least it's not like the first Crysis which was so demanding that it needed a GPU they couldn't even make up.

Loobyluggs:

I wonder if this time the will release the game with the cut scene they somehow forgot to show us when they originally released the game. Y'know the one I'm talking about, right? The one where Joel fate was decided several years into the future by a little girl crying over the loss of her father, who was going to cut open a little girl for scientific experiments that were unjustified and unproven. That scene.

I played the game on the PS4 and i don`t remember the scene you are talking about. Don`t know if i skipped it or saw it and already forgot about it.

schmidtbag:

Well at least it's not like the first Crysis which was so demanding that it needed a GPU they couldn't even make up.

At least Crysis had the amazing graphics to back it up. I doubt that`s the case with this game.

I find it funny that as the resolution goes up, so does the need for stronger processors. I'm betting a 5600x at 1440p would have the same framerate at 4k, vs the 5900x.

mattm4:

I find it funny that as the resolution goes up, so does the need for stronger processors. I'm betting a 5600x at 1440p would have the same framerate at 4k, vs the 5900x.

Yeah I find it funny as well ...maybe they then count in ray tracing? .... I guess.

H83:

I played the game on the PS4 and i don`t remember the scene you are talking about. Don`t know if i skipped it or saw it and already forgot about it.

They showed you the scene in the second game, because they forgot to include it in the first game for some reason. No one really knows why they forgot to include the scene in the first game...although rumours are that it was contradictory, illogical and would have undone the efforts of the player of every scene involving playing as Joel, only to find that at the end (dum dum duuuuum) you killed a scientist who had a daughter and that, in itself; would be a reverse-paterntus-interruptus to inversely mirror the loss of Joels' daughter at the beginning of the game, and of course, would render the logic of having Ellie forgive him for having to make a difficult decision to save her life, pointless. But...that is just a rumour - because, why would they want to negate every single action in the first game in a cut scene that we didn't get to see? I mean, it makes no sense, so, it must have been for another reason. Ask Neil Cuckman, next to you don't see him being as professor of logic at smarty-pants university for geniuses of logic...over a glass of warm cuck-juice, AKA soy milk and gingerbread Joels. I heard he bites the heads off before dunking them in...

Venix:

Yeah I find it funny as well ...maybe they then count in ray tracing? .... I guess.

Makes sense, rt is very demanding on the cpu and uses more vram. Both recommended gpus for 1440p/60fps are 11 and 12gb.

Loobyluggs:

They showed you the scene in the second game, because they forgot to include it in the first game for some reason. No one really knows why they forgot to include the scene in the first game...although rumours are that it was contradictory, illogical and would have undone the efforts of the player of every scene involving playing as Joel, only to find that at the end (dum dum duuuuum) you killed a scientist who had a daughter and that, in itself; would be a reverse-paterntus-interruptus to inversely mirror the loss of Joels' daughter at the beginning of the game, and of course, would render the logic of having Ellie forgive him for having to make a difficult decision to save her life, pointless. But...that is just a rumour - because, why would they want to negate every single action in the first game in a cut scene that we didn't get to see? I mean, it makes no sense, so, it must have been for another reason. Ask Neil Cuckman, next to you don't see him being as professor of logic at smarty-pants university for geniuses of logic...over a glass of warm cuck-juice, AKA soy milk and gingerbread Joels. I heard he bites the heads off before dunking them in...

I read it like 6 times and I still have no idea what the fuck this is saying

Reardan:

I read it like 6 times and I still have no idea what the frack this is saying

Follow my logic: Could the player have stopped Joel from being killed in the second game? No. Could the player have finished the first game by letting Ellie die? No. Were any other choices presented to the player other than 'save Ellie to finish the game'? No. All effort by the player was therefore rendered 'a big waste of time' as a result, and so, if was no choice about Joel living or dying and, Ellie living or dying - then all the time and effort that the player put into the game was literally 'for nothing'. If, however, the player had a choice about how the player saved Ellie, then perhaps Abby would not have had her father killed co-incidentally by Joel (the player). You with me now? Or do I need to draw a flow chart?

In retrospect it was about all the npc's we as the player killed throughout the entirety of the first game that will result in any future games being created so family & friends of those npc's we as the player killed in our meaningless attempt of staying alive in a post apocalyptic word can get back at the player and then teach us the meaning of life. [spoiler]42[/spoiler]

Loobyluggs:

Follow my logic: Could the player have stopped Joel from being killed in the second game? No. Could the player have finished the first game by letting Ellie die? No. Were any other choices presented to the player other than 'save Ellie to finish the game'? No. All effort by the player was therefore rendered 'a big waste of time' as a result, and so, if was no choice about Joel living or dying and, Ellie living or dying - then all the time and effort that the player put into the game was literally 'for nothing'. If, however, the player had a choice about how the player saved Ellie, then perhaps Abby would not have had her father killed co-incidentally by Joel (the player). You with me now? Or do I need to draw a flow chart?

Lol this is the dumbest criticism of the Last of Us I've ever come across. This game really broke y'all's brains.

Reardan:

Lol this is the dumbest criticism of the Last of Us I've ever come across. This game really broke y'all's brains.

I appreciate the comment, but I cannot acquiesce, not even mildly if you are just going to ignore the logic of killing a player character because of a cut scene we didn't get to see in the first game, combined with the game's plot demanding that the player had to save Ellie to finish the game. If you did not save Ellie, the game would fail you - so, to save Ellie is to die regardless, so, why bother saving Ellie if by doing so means you will die? The game does not tell you this. The game is clear on you saving Ellie. The game does not give you a choice. The game is therefore killing you off regardless, but only once the sequel is played through. The outcome of Joel is not decided by the player The outcome of Joel is decided by a cut scene The entire game is therefore meaningless and has the gameplay simplicity of 'push button on wall to advance the plot'. The only thing the player has is 'agency' but, there is no other outcome possible other than the outcome they give you. If you want to argue logic with me, fine, but you will fail because you cannot affect the plot in any way, because it has been written as such. Linear storytelling that kills the player character (Joel) because of a cut scene, which only existed because of the player not being given a choice to save Ellie or not. They killed the player for doing what they told the player to do.

Loobyluggs:

I appreciate the comment, but I cannot acquiesce, not even mildly if you are just going to ignore the logic of killing a player character because of a cut scene we didn't get to see in the first game, combined with the game's plot demanding that the player had to save Ellie to finish the game. If you did not save Ellie, the game would fail you - so, to save Ellie is to die regardless, so, why bother saving Ellie if by doing so means you will die? The game does not tell you this. The game is clear on you saving Ellie. The game does not give you a choice. The game is therefore killing you off regardless, but only once the sequel is played through. The outcome of Joel is not decided by the player The outcome of Joel is decided by a cut scene The entire game is therefore meaningless and has the gameplay simplicity of 'push button on wall to advance the plot'. The only thing the player has is 'agency' but, there is no other outcome possible other than the outcome they give you. If you want to argue logic with me, fine, but you will fail because you cannot affect the plot in any way, because it has been written as such. Linear storytelling that kills the player character (Joel) because of a cut scene, which only existed because of the player not being given a choice to save Ellie or not. They killed the player for doing what they told the player to do.

Sorry this was the dumbest one

@Loobyluggs well I never touched the game but I heard people where angry with the sequel now I see why !

Reardan:

Sorry this was the dumbest one

It's okay, I accept your apology, no need to call yourself dumb, just say 'thank you for clarifying the lack of logic in linear computer game storytelling' and I will apologise if ever gave you impression I was attacking you, because that was not the case. I mean, it's not like I told you to figuratively rescue a young girl who you have built up a bond between, kill a bunch of people holding them captive for experimental scientific reasons, with full intent to do harm to that person, knowing full well that I was the person who killed your daughter years ago, only to kill you off in a few years into the future, by the daughter of one of the people I am asking you to kill now, even though this person is someone who has helped you realise your worth in the world and that by rescuing her, healing deep, psychological wounds that I inflicted upon the death of your daughter, and, left you a bitter person unable to see the light of life ever again, would make your the world seem liveable again. Because that really would be a pointless waste of time. And mean, but mostly, just illogical.