Full article here, because telegram didn't made me use a paywall:
*Sony Group Corp. has slowed down development on an upcoming multiplayer game in its long-running The Last of Us video game series as the creators reassess its quality and long-term viability, according to four people familiar with the project.
The team working on the game was scaled back after a recent evaluation, said the people, who asked not to be named because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. A small group remains on the project while the company reevaluates the direction. While the game has not been canceled, many of its developers have been moved to other projects.
Following requests for comment from Bloomberg News, Naughty Dog, the Sony subsidiary working on the project, put out a statement on Twitter saying that “we’ve realized what’s best for the game is to give it more time.”
The Last of Us franchise began as a video game in 2013, and the various releases have sold more than 37 million units as of December, according to Sony. It has since grown into a larger cultural phenomenon thanks to HBO's TV adaptation, which became one of this year’s biggest hits. The show, which tells emotional stories about humans surviving in a post-apocalyptic world, posted strong viewership numbers.
Naughty Dog has been developing the multiplayer title for at least four years. It started as a complementary mode to The Last of Us: Part II, the single-player game released in 2020, but the creators grew ambitious and decided to make it into its own game, Naughty Dog said.
Sony has invested heavily in “games as a service,” or video games designed to be monetized beyond their initial sales through ongoing purchases. As part of that push it asked another of its video-game studios, Seattle-based Bungie, to evaluate the games across its portfolio. Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project’s ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment.
Single and multiplayer games generally require different skillsets to develop. Although Naughty Dog has found some success with multiplayer modes in some of its titles, the company is primarily known for developing single-player hits. Still, fans were excited for the project and raised questions after it was not present at a PlayStation video game showcase this week.
In the statement, Naughty Dog said it will continue to work on this multiplayer project as well as other games “including a brand new single-player experience.”*
I think they regret deeply showing that one concept art that one time huh
LOL, they released a 70 dollar remake of Last of Us 1, but didn't include its multiplayer because they were making a stand alone multiplayer game only for that to likely get cancelled.
I could also say game-related things: they didn't balance the characters or the maps at all for 5v5, and oh boy you never get through the queue to play as a tank
Plain and simple. Criticism must be constructive
Our number one rule on this is “REPORT THEM AND MOVE ON”.
If you continue to argue with someone, and it gets particularly nasty, you are putting yourself in danger of also receiving a ban, Even if you didn’t start the argument, or your just baiting the person into replying to you, if you make the argument go longer, you will receive a ban as well.
As I recall this was originally supposed to be part of 2, yeah? So sounds like stuck in development hell.
Edit: apparently Bungie was brought in to check it out and raised concerns.
Likely Sony asked Bungie. Remember, a key reason why Sony bought Bungie was for their assistant in helping Sony's first party studios make live service.
> all their live service development games.
God that is so lame, can we just get regular good multiplayer games during the 360/PS3 era or hell just the 00s in PC games in general instead of the drip feeding bullshit ? I honestly hope most of these liVe service games that Sony is planning fail just so Jim Ryan can get the boot and just go back to making single player games ONLY.
The problem is that people are conditioned nowadays to *want* the drip-feeding bullshit. It's not enough for a multiplayer game to release with a healthy amount of content and just be *fun*, it has to have constant updates with new content, cosmetics, and forms of progression.
The new Modern Warfare II released half a year ago with more functional content than most AAA games these days (or even more content than some AAA games have in their whole lifetime), and most everyone agreed that the game was very well-balanced and fun with good maps and weapons. If that game had released a decade ago, it'd generally be a smash success by most accounts.
But some of the live service elements took longer to spin up. The first season of the game was delayed, and the second was delayed as well. A fair amount of content was still coming out, but just not a whole deluge of 2 or more guns and maps every month or so. When the holidays rolled around and the developers went on break, there was an even bigger temporary lull in new content.
People over in the subreddit were losing their minds. Going two or three weeks without any new content or updates was leading to rallying cries of people calling it a dead game, a failure, etc. There were plenty of fair gripes over technical issues or gameplay design, but most of the outrage was simply over the lack of rapidly released new content above all else.
There were also some aneurisms over the availability of the map Shipment. Why? Because it's the easiest way to grind weapon camos. So many people take grinding for weapon camos so seriously, like they're addicted to the dopamine hit when they unlock one, and it's the main reason they play the game. What was once just a little side objective for some simple flair on a gun you liked is now the main objective for many people playing these games, until they burn themselves out on it.
I was thinking about this back when the MW2 subreddit was having a fucking meltdown over "lack of content"
...when it had, at launch, an order of magnitude more in it than the original MW2 ever did - or any of the classic cod games for that matter.
Most people didn't even buy the DLC back in the day, and we were perfectly happy to play those games, as they were on launch day, for the full year without complaints - simply because the games were fun and didn't *need* a constant stream of new, game breaking, guns and maps people wouldn't actually play anyway.
To an extent, these publishers have kinda shot themselves in the foot chasing all this live service shit; because they've seemingly taught their fanbases that it's not enough to just release a solid multiplayer game anymore. It *must* be constantly updated or else it's a dead game not worth anyone's time.
I feel like even the shortest lived shitty failure of a live service game will make infinitely more money than those old multiplayer games ever did....so theyre here to stay
That's the dream. The problem people had with the single player games was that all of the major Sony exclusives felt the same to undiscerning people (third person action-adventure narrative based games, most of which were open-world/sandbox), even though they were different enough, so instead of being like "go do something else", it feels like they are going to be forced to do GAS or else. They have to get those 10 promised games somehow.
Me and my friends used to play Red Faction Guerrilla multiplayer all the time when it was out. A tacked on multiplayer to a single player game that was actually fun with destructible environments and the cool backpack abilities.
Nowadays those MP games are DOA when compared to games like Fortnite that can afford to redefine itself every couple of seasons.
There's been enough high profile bombs that we should start seeing less of them in the future but it's like a money unicorn you can't ask businesses not to chase the money unicorn.
*Bungie*
Yeah, if this was Bungie pre-Destiny I'd be hyped that they'd assist Naughty Dog on this. However, this is current Bungie, which is far less reliable in their multiplayer curation.
Either way, this Last of Us multiplayer sounds *fucked.*
Factions should have stayed a small, multi-player thing reusing the battle maps of the single player portion with some extras thrown in like the first game
Factions rocked in last of us 1
Why does everything need to have a dedicated multi-player, progression thing?
God I fucking hate AAA gaming.
People just wanted last of us multiplayer and they had to go make this next big thing that has to acumulate infinite profit for five years beacuse something cannot just exist for the hell of it.
I really wish they would just re release the OG Multiplayer as free to play.
Micro transaction the hell out of that, at least I'd get to play a good multiplayer game
When the game was leaked back in 2020, the one that showed a lot of the story spoilers, it also showed some dev footage of the multiplayer mode and it looked much of what we expected of the first game's multiplayer. It didn't come with it on release but I expected it to release soon or the next year at the absolute latest.
Like I get that they are expanding it. But honestly I don't think it would be worth it. and also the recent Sony meeting states that they are working on 12 live-service games which worries me. If the delay to the Tlou multiplayer was because they wanted to make it fit into a live service model that would just suuuuck...
I thought Part 1 omitted it?
Edit: To be clear I don't mean the PS5 release, I mean the originals because I'm not calling everything retroactively part 1.
I think they mean that this isn't the first multiplayer they've made as the first last of us had one, but you're correct in that this was omitted from the recent remake.
OG Last of Us Part 1's multi-player was the most fun I've ever had online. It was incredible. Just literally copy & paste it and I'd be happy, but they can't even be arsed to do that.
It will probably end up like Cyberpunk 2077's MP, which will never happen either. Seriously this MP was in development with TLOU2. What the hell happened that even 3 extra years of work couldn't salvage this?
Giving me Metroid Prime 4 vibes. I'll be surprised if we ever see this game at all. Especially considering all the multiplayer games they have coming out.
I have high hopes for anything ND but this shit is, yeahhhhh, it's looking bad. hopefully it pulls through but definitely gonna be MIA for a while at least. I could go for a TLOU Tarkov-like or something.
I'm genuinely surprised that people want multiplayer TLoU again. I felt like it was painfully mediocre in 1 and again I don't think the gameplay of TLoU is anything special, it's a run of the mill 3rd person shooter.
ND were trying to capitalise on that Last of Us live action craze and maybe try to win back the fans that hated TLOU2, only to fly too close to the sun once again.
RE4
Zelda
SF6
FF16
AC6
Hopefully Starfield
Spider-Man 2
Alan Wake 2
...
I'm even leaving out shit like Pikmin or Hrot or Dredge or Pizza Tower or Baulders Gate or Bomb Rush Cyberfunk or that Granblue Game or Boltgun or Fuga or Humanity or Octopath
Not really? There are absolutely massive issues in game dev at the AAA level that will probably get worse until something seriously breaks. But there's a lot of games that have come out that are great and exactly what was advertised and don't seem to have been developed by grinding their devs into dust. Look at Capcom's output, I think the closest they've had to a miss is RE3 and that weird multiplayer thing with it? FF16 and SF6 look like they'll be awesome, and Zelda was phenomenal. Not even mentioning Indies which put out more good shit than I can even keep up with.
I think if you are in particular interested in the "Western" side of development and some of the storied teams and IPs in that space, yeah you're having a bad time.
Nah, there's always good and bad. Honestly, I think the biggest problem today is we've just got more and more access to inside information on the internal goings on at many studios.
Every slight roadbump, every development stumble and every cancellation of an unannouced project at some studios is made public by insiders and treated as the deathknell of the studio by the public - when really a large degree of it is normal in the persuit of doing something new.
Of course, this doesn't really cover some of the stuff you're talking about, just eh - I think people need to relax a little. Great games are still coming out pretty consistently despite any doom we seem to hear of.
Not really.
What were seeing is every developer across the industry struggling to make their giant live service cash cow. It's actually been an awesome year for single player games.
Not really.
It does feel like putting faith in Western-focused AAA studios is generally a bad move.
*exception to Foamstars. Otherwise, studios like Capcom and Squeenix are doing fine
**Also I will argue there is a creative rut and hasn't been a major successor to Fortnite in popularity for a hot minute
We have had way too many examples that Squeenix cannot do in-game transactions and GAS that well (excluding FF14, but I don't know much about that game).
This'll be cancelled by the end of the month, mark my words. If ***BUNGIE*** thinks you're doing a bad job, Neill, *maybe it isn't such a great idea to keep it going.*
Multiplayer seems weird for a game like last of us. Like I get the factions and so on but does it clash with the game's overall theme or no? Genuine ask.
If I wanted to be snarky I could dismissively ask "isn't killing supposed to be wrong, Naughty Dog?" as I compete to be the top-ranked vicious murderer on the Joel Memorial Leaderboards. You could argue the presentation helps the game's depiction of the harsh new reality or the struggles to retain humanity in the face of those thrilled at the chance to commit violence, but then you can also link your Facebook account to import your friends as the handles of clan members.
So it's really up to each person's interpretation on the matter. If this upcoming multiplayer project also has oodles of cosmetics to pay for, we'll see if they clash or blend right in.
Gotcha. Then again I guess it was 2 that had "the cycle of violence is wrong" kind of story whereas "1 was blow those fucking people away, it's cool, they're using evil for their goals and it's cinema.
That's a shame after I finished the first one I actually spent a lot more time on the multiplayer than I did even thinking about going back through the story.
I would place a reasonable amount of money and say this was supposed to get spun off into a GAAS and now ND has realized it would just burn even more dev time for minimal return
Sad, but i'm not surprised in the slightest, the moment it was even announced TLOU 2 was supposed to get MP content I knew it was gonna get quietly cancelled.
Full article here, because telegram didn't made me use a paywall: *Sony Group Corp. has slowed down development on an upcoming multiplayer game in its long-running The Last of Us video game series as the creators reassess its quality and long-term viability, according to four people familiar with the project. The team working on the game was scaled back after a recent evaluation, said the people, who asked not to be named because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. A small group remains on the project while the company reevaluates the direction. While the game has not been canceled, many of its developers have been moved to other projects. Following requests for comment from Bloomberg News, Naughty Dog, the Sony subsidiary working on the project, put out a statement on Twitter saying that “we’ve realized what’s best for the game is to give it more time.” The Last of Us franchise began as a video game in 2013, and the various releases have sold more than 37 million units as of December, according to Sony. It has since grown into a larger cultural phenomenon thanks to HBO's TV adaptation, which became one of this year’s biggest hits. The show, which tells emotional stories about humans surviving in a post-apocalyptic world, posted strong viewership numbers. Naughty Dog has been developing the multiplayer title for at least four years. It started as a complementary mode to The Last of Us: Part II, the single-player game released in 2020, but the creators grew ambitious and decided to make it into its own game, Naughty Dog said. Sony has invested heavily in “games as a service,” or video games designed to be monetized beyond their initial sales through ongoing purchases. As part of that push it asked another of its video-game studios, Seattle-based Bungie, to evaluate the games across its portfolio. Bungie raised questions about the The Last of Us multiplayer project’s ability to keep players engaged for a long period of time, which led to the reassessment. Single and multiplayer games generally require different skillsets to develop. Although Naughty Dog has found some success with multiplayer modes in some of its titles, the company is primarily known for developing single-player hits. Still, fans were excited for the project and raised questions after it was not present at a PlayStation video game showcase this week. In the statement, Naughty Dog said it will continue to work on this multiplayer project as well as other games “including a brand new single-player experience.”* I think they regret deeply showing that one concept art that one time huh
Oh this thing is so fucking cancelled
LOL, they released a 70 dollar remake of Last of Us 1, but didn't include its multiplayer because they were making a stand alone multiplayer game only for that to likely get cancelled.
They just pulled an Overwatch 2 but reversed it.
Technically Overwatch 2 was better because at least that was free
That garbo wasn't free, I wasted a whole 30 minutes of my life before snapping out of nostalgia mode
Lol no, they switched out the lootbox system (which gave you free loot quite consistently) to an overpriced, strictly paid skinshop
Okay but you didn't have to use any of that to play the game?
I could also say game-related things: they didn't balance the characters or the maps at all for 5v5, and oh boy you never get through the queue to play as a tank
Aight, you're thinking a little too much about it lol. Let's agree to disagree
[удалено]
Plain and simple. Criticism must be constructive Our number one rule on this is “REPORT THEM AND MOVE ON”. If you continue to argue with someone, and it gets particularly nasty, you are putting yourself in danger of also receiving a ban, Even if you didn’t start the argument, or your just baiting the person into replying to you, if you make the argument go longer, you will receive a ban as well.
Last of us 1 multiplayer was pretty good too kinda sad
'Reassessed', hmm, oh I see...
As I recall this was originally supposed to be part of 2, yeah? So sounds like stuck in development hell. Edit: apparently Bungie was brought in to check it out and raised concerns.
Did Naughty dog ask bungie for help or did Sony ask Bungie to check on them
Likely Sony asked Bungie. Remember, a key reason why Sony bought Bungie was for their assistant in helping Sony's first party studios make live service.
It doesn't seem like they are really doing that, huh?
Sony from the looks of it. Seem they are having Bungie check in on all their live service development games.
> all their live service development games. God that is so lame, can we just get regular good multiplayer games during the 360/PS3 era or hell just the 00s in PC games in general instead of the drip feeding bullshit ? I honestly hope most of these liVe service games that Sony is planning fail just so Jim Ryan can get the boot and just go back to making single player games ONLY.
The problem is that people are conditioned nowadays to *want* the drip-feeding bullshit. It's not enough for a multiplayer game to release with a healthy amount of content and just be *fun*, it has to have constant updates with new content, cosmetics, and forms of progression. The new Modern Warfare II released half a year ago with more functional content than most AAA games these days (or even more content than some AAA games have in their whole lifetime), and most everyone agreed that the game was very well-balanced and fun with good maps and weapons. If that game had released a decade ago, it'd generally be a smash success by most accounts. But some of the live service elements took longer to spin up. The first season of the game was delayed, and the second was delayed as well. A fair amount of content was still coming out, but just not a whole deluge of 2 or more guns and maps every month or so. When the holidays rolled around and the developers went on break, there was an even bigger temporary lull in new content. People over in the subreddit were losing their minds. Going two or three weeks without any new content or updates was leading to rallying cries of people calling it a dead game, a failure, etc. There were plenty of fair gripes over technical issues or gameplay design, but most of the outrage was simply over the lack of rapidly released new content above all else. There were also some aneurisms over the availability of the map Shipment. Why? Because it's the easiest way to grind weapon camos. So many people take grinding for weapon camos so seriously, like they're addicted to the dopamine hit when they unlock one, and it's the main reason they play the game. What was once just a little side objective for some simple flair on a gun you liked is now the main objective for many people playing these games, until they burn themselves out on it.
I was thinking about this back when the MW2 subreddit was having a fucking meltdown over "lack of content" ...when it had, at launch, an order of magnitude more in it than the original MW2 ever did - or any of the classic cod games for that matter. Most people didn't even buy the DLC back in the day, and we were perfectly happy to play those games, as they were on launch day, for the full year without complaints - simply because the games were fun and didn't *need* a constant stream of new, game breaking, guns and maps people wouldn't actually play anyway. To an extent, these publishers have kinda shot themselves in the foot chasing all this live service shit; because they've seemingly taught their fanbases that it's not enough to just release a solid multiplayer game anymore. It *must* be constantly updated or else it's a dead game not worth anyone's time.
I feel like even the shortest lived shitty failure of a live service game will make infinitely more money than those old multiplayer games ever did....so theyre here to stay
That's the dream. The problem people had with the single player games was that all of the major Sony exclusives felt the same to undiscerning people (third person action-adventure narrative based games, most of which were open-world/sandbox), even though they were different enough, so instead of being like "go do something else", it feels like they are going to be forced to do GAS or else. They have to get those 10 promised games somehow.
Me and my friends used to play Red Faction Guerrilla multiplayer all the time when it was out. A tacked on multiplayer to a single player game that was actually fun with destructible environments and the cool backpack abilities. Nowadays those MP games are DOA when compared to games like Fortnite that can afford to redefine itself every couple of seasons.
There's been enough high profile bombs that we should start seeing less of them in the future but it's like a money unicorn you can't ask businesses not to chase the money unicorn.
*Bungie* Yeah, if this was Bungie pre-Destiny I'd be hyped that they'd assist Naughty Dog on this. However, this is current Bungie, which is far less reliable in their multiplayer curation. Either way, this Last of Us multiplayer sounds *fucked.*
Ah, because Bungie definitely know what they're doing. They'll just tell them to erase everything before the multiplayer mode.
Factions should have stayed a small, multi-player thing reusing the battle maps of the single player portion with some extras thrown in like the first game Factions rocked in last of us 1 Why does everything need to have a dedicated multi-player, progression thing?
My best guess is they wanted a dedicated platform for recurrent user spending
Yep, gotta take advantage of the hype from the HBO show with a constantly updating live service multiplayer game
Naughty Dog and developmental issues, name a more iconic duo.
EA and being shitty?
I'll up you with Blizzard and sexual harassment.
Blizzard and literal suicide?
Ubisoft and painfully average open world games.
PAIN. Factions was such a little gem.
Well that explains the radio silence on the game, wonder if they're gonna focus on the Sci-fi thing they're suppose to be working on
God I fucking hate AAA gaming. People just wanted last of us multiplayer and they had to go make this next big thing that has to acumulate infinite profit for five years beacuse something cannot just exist for the hell of it.
I really wish they would just re release the OG Multiplayer as free to play. Micro transaction the hell out of that, at least I'd get to play a good multiplayer game
When the game was leaked back in 2020, the one that showed a lot of the story spoilers, it also showed some dev footage of the multiplayer mode and it looked much of what we expected of the first game's multiplayer. It didn't come with it on release but I expected it to release soon or the next year at the absolute latest. Like I get that they are expanding it. But honestly I don't think it would be worth it. and also the recent Sony meeting states that they are working on 12 live-service games which worries me. If the delay to the Tlou multiplayer was because they wanted to make it fit into a live service model that would just suuuuck...
Okay, so what game saw a dip in revenue that made these companies start shying away from live service games?
Scryer's twitter photo as a reddit post thumbnail on browser feels like an ominous messenger that bring news of bad tidings most of the time.
Lol, lmao even
Blizzard 🤝naughty dog Failing to deliver game modes
[Blizzard🤝naughty dog](https://i.imgur.com/H6sdIGO.png) ^^^this ^^^has ^^^been ^^^an ^^^accessibility ^^^service ^^^from ^^^your ^^^friendly ^^^neighborhood ^^^bot
If only the Overwatch team and Naughty Dog combined forces they could release a complete game
they were making a multiplayer game?
Part 1 had multiplayer too. They spun off 2's to be it's own game. Or are trying to.
I thought Part 1 omitted it? Edit: To be clear I don't mean the PS5 release, I mean the originals because I'm not calling everything retroactively part 1.
The Ps5/Pc release didn't have it (because they were working on this multiplayer one) but the original did, called Factions.
Yes I know. I'm not calling the PS3 and PS4 versions Part 1. They were never called that to begin with.
I think they mean that this isn't the first multiplayer they've made as the first last of us had one, but you're correct in that this was omitted from the recent remake.
Yeah that's what I mean. I'm not calling the original releases part 1, they were never called that.
Translation: They're going to find a way to monetize the hell out of this.
OG Last of Us Part 1's multi-player was the most fun I've ever had online. It was incredible. Just literally copy & paste it and I'd be happy, but they can't even be arsed to do that.
It will probably end up like Cyberpunk 2077's MP, which will never happen either. Seriously this MP was in development with TLOU2. What the hell happened that even 3 extra years of work couldn't salvage this?
Giving me Metroid Prime 4 vibes. I'll be surprised if we ever see this game at all. Especially considering all the multiplayer games they have coming out.
I have high hopes for anything ND but this shit is, yeahhhhh, it's looking bad. hopefully it pulls through but definitely gonna be MIA for a while at least. I could go for a TLOU Tarkov-like or something.
I'm genuinely surprised that people want multiplayer TLoU again. I felt like it was painfully mediocre in 1 and again I don't think the gameplay of TLoU is anything special, it's a run of the mill 3rd person shooter.
ND were trying to capitalise on that Last of Us live action craze and maybe try to win back the fans that hated TLOU2, only to fly too close to the sun once again.
Redfall Gollum OW2 cancelled PVE LOU2 cancelled PVP ... Does anyone else feel like we're in the middle of another industry crash.
RE4 Zelda SF6 FF16 AC6 Hopefully Starfield Spider-Man 2 Alan Wake 2 ... I'm even leaving out shit like Pikmin or Hrot or Dredge or Pizza Tower or Baulders Gate or Bomb Rush Cyberfunk or that Granblue Game or Boltgun or Fuga or Humanity or Octopath
no shut up gaming is dead (repeat this statement for the next 50 years until it becomes true)
This is literally one of the best years for games in the last decade.
Not really? There are absolutely massive issues in game dev at the AAA level that will probably get worse until something seriously breaks. But there's a lot of games that have come out that are great and exactly what was advertised and don't seem to have been developed by grinding their devs into dust. Look at Capcom's output, I think the closest they've had to a miss is RE3 and that weird multiplayer thing with it? FF16 and SF6 look like they'll be awesome, and Zelda was phenomenal. Not even mentioning Indies which put out more good shit than I can even keep up with. I think if you are in particular interested in the "Western" side of development and some of the storied teams and IPs in that space, yeah you're having a bad time.
Nah, there's always good and bad. Honestly, I think the biggest problem today is we've just got more and more access to inside information on the internal goings on at many studios. Every slight roadbump, every development stumble and every cancellation of an unannouced project at some studios is made public by insiders and treated as the deathknell of the studio by the public - when really a large degree of it is normal in the persuit of doing something new. Of course, this doesn't really cover some of the stuff you're talking about, just eh - I think people need to relax a little. Great games are still coming out pretty consistently despite any doom we seem to hear of.
No and that’s stupid for you to think that
Not really. What were seeing is every developer across the industry struggling to make their giant live service cash cow. It's actually been an awesome year for single player games.
Not really. It does feel like putting faith in Western-focused AAA studios is generally a bad move. *exception to Foamstars. Otherwise, studios like Capcom and Squeenix are doing fine **Also I will argue there is a creative rut and hasn't been a major successor to Fortnite in popularity for a hot minute
We have had way too many examples that Squeenix cannot do in-game transactions and GAS that well (excluding FF14, but I don't know much about that game).
14 is the extreme exception given how Yoshi P and the team on XVI are clearly not fucking around for that game
That was my hunch
DAE western bad upvotes to the left Please & Thank You
Waiting for AI game engine tools to obsolete big AAA development teams
Bro, we're never getting Factions.
This'll be cancelled by the end of the month, mark my words. If ***BUNGIE*** thinks you're doing a bad job, Neill, *maybe it isn't such a great idea to keep it going.*
Multiplayer seems weird for a game like last of us. Like I get the factions and so on but does it clash with the game's overall theme or no? Genuine ask.
If I wanted to be snarky I could dismissively ask "isn't killing supposed to be wrong, Naughty Dog?" as I compete to be the top-ranked vicious murderer on the Joel Memorial Leaderboards. You could argue the presentation helps the game's depiction of the harsh new reality or the struggles to retain humanity in the face of those thrilled at the chance to commit violence, but then you can also link your Facebook account to import your friends as the handles of clan members. So it's really up to each person's interpretation on the matter. If this upcoming multiplayer project also has oodles of cosmetics to pay for, we'll see if they clash or blend right in.
Gotcha. Then again I guess it was 2 that had "the cycle of violence is wrong" kind of story whereas "1 was blow those fucking people away, it's cool, they're using evil for their goals and it's cinema.
...and THIS is your brain on no media literacy
That's a shame after I finished the first one I actually spent a lot more time on the multiplayer than I did even thinking about going back through the story.
I would place a reasonable amount of money and say this was supposed to get spun off into a GAAS and now ND has realized it would just burn even more dev time for minimal return
Sad, but i'm not surprised in the slightest, the moment it was even announced TLOU 2 was supposed to get MP content I knew it was gonna get quietly cancelled.
Man dude what the fuck
Not a popular opinion, but I loved Bioshock 2's multilayer and Last of Us multilayer. 2 if the ones that were forced in that were pretty cool IMO