looneymoon
they/them
- AKA
- Rishi
Nier Automata, Shadow of the Colossus, Undertale... and even the original The Last of Us are all well-received games that make it a point to make the player feel bad for partaking in combat. That's just off the top of my head. I'm not sure I would describe any of those games as having dissonance due to their "fun" factor. Maybe the article is referring exclusively to the evolution of the shooter genre? If "fun" is a standard by which we are qualifying core gameplay, I'm not even sure where to begin. "Fun" is probably one of the nebulous, subjective, indefinable, and inconsistent part of a person's experience. Something that is "fun" to me one day could easily bore me the next.
Regardless of that, on a technical level, a game needs to "play well" in order to allow players into its space. For a shooter, that means the aim, sway, and recoil serve towards the player's sense of agency in every small decision. The level design needs to guide players from point A to point B in a way that flows and makes sense. Ultimately, this is all in the service of "fun" yeah, but this is also part of the "grammar" of a game. These aspects are necessary in order for a game to "read" clearly.
I think the issue people are having with TLOU2 is that there's this intentionally divisive, off-putting (for many) story that seems to go against the otherwise very articulate crafting of the "play" portions of the game.
Regardless of that, on a technical level, a game needs to "play well" in order to allow players into its space. For a shooter, that means the aim, sway, and recoil serve towards the player's sense of agency in every small decision. The level design needs to guide players from point A to point B in a way that flows and makes sense. Ultimately, this is all in the service of "fun" yeah, but this is also part of the "grammar" of a game. These aspects are necessary in order for a game to "read" clearly.
I think the issue people are having with TLOU2 is that there's this intentionally divisive, off-putting (for many) story that seems to go against the otherwise very articulate crafting of the "play" portions of the game.
I think the issue with TLOU2 is that its commentary comes across as "preachy" to a lot of players. It also relies on some cheap shots to force contemplation on the fun-violence factor. I was listening to a podcast discussing the "ludonarrative dissonance" by using the example of Shimmer the Horse. They kill her off by blowing her up with a trip wire. Her death is necessary for practical purposes - at this point, she can't stick around for the next levels of the game. If the game wasn't so dead set on taking the violence so seriously, this scene could come across as having a Resident Evil-like quality of campiness. Since this game is so hyper-serious, there is a disjoint then, when Shimmer viscerally screams in pain before being popped in the head. There's not a whole lot of emotional arc to the horse to earn that level of misery, and its frank presentation comes off as over-the-top. At the same time, it's inherently upsetting because that's your horsie, isn't that sad?
I know thats a lot of extrapolation from the death scene of a horse. I think its an easy example to use due to the fact that the first game also had a horse character that is also arguably propped up for some sad points. In terms of Callus vs Shimmer, I think there are a few things one can list which makes the former feel more elegantly handled than the latter.
I know thats a lot of extrapolation from the death scene of a horse. I think its an easy example to use due to the fact that the first game also had a horse character that is also arguably propped up for some sad points. In terms of Callus vs Shimmer, I think there are a few things one can list which makes the former feel more elegantly handled than the latter.
Last edited: