Cohh's unfair review of TLOU2
Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2020 3:10 pm
I appreciate that Cohh played and reviewed this game but I find it biased so forgive my venting –
Cohh pushes how objectively bad this game is and cancels conflicting opinions. I feel this is an unfair summary of the game while pushing cancel culture to the fore and regressive for storytelling in gaming.
His strongest criticism by far is pacing giving it a 2/10, to expand on this he says it makes the experience distracting and forced by going back and forth with perspectives and timelines. This is a structure choice, TLOU1 has a macro story that keeps progressing and micro ones that occur throughout i.e Getting to Bill to get a car. TLOU2 structure does exposition and world building through flashbacks and often halts the macro story to achieve this, however this is much needed time to reflect and the pacing works the same as the former linear structure that Cohh prefers. This is a 2/10 on structure and is a subjective matter.
The next biggest criticism is no Joel and the lack of Joel/Ellie relationship development from TLOU1. In this review Cohh fails to give people the benefit of the doubt who think Joel deserved what he got coming which he does MANY times throughout the play through. The ending scene is literally Joel and Ellie getting back on the right foot and gives a new outlook on why Ellie fought so hard to avenge him. The dynamic between the two changes a lot throughout i.e. Ellie's birthday and when Joel tells her the truth about the incident. Cohh fails to remember any of this, he is lazy when he says the story is done "in a different way" but is harder on the delivery of the story than the story itself so I won't press on this.
He is bigoted when addressing the comment "What do you think about people giving this game a 10/10". He asserts to like this game you have to put the good parts "on a pedestal" and just forget the bad ones... He complains about how people are polarized by the game and this is somehow a bad thing intrinsic to the game. The irony is Cohh states the game is objectively mediocre and rejects any other opinion of the game, so of course people who disagree are going to call you out like this and create this polarizing atmosphere because the fire was already started.
I ask Cohh to be less biased in future reviews and be open to discourse emerging from games, especially ones as innovative in storytelling as this.
Cohh pushes how objectively bad this game is and cancels conflicting opinions. I feel this is an unfair summary of the game while pushing cancel culture to the fore and regressive for storytelling in gaming.
His strongest criticism by far is pacing giving it a 2/10, to expand on this he says it makes the experience distracting and forced by going back and forth with perspectives and timelines. This is a structure choice, TLOU1 has a macro story that keeps progressing and micro ones that occur throughout i.e Getting to Bill to get a car. TLOU2 structure does exposition and world building through flashbacks and often halts the macro story to achieve this, however this is much needed time to reflect and the pacing works the same as the former linear structure that Cohh prefers. This is a 2/10 on structure and is a subjective matter.
The next biggest criticism is no Joel and the lack of Joel/Ellie relationship development from TLOU1. In this review Cohh fails to give people the benefit of the doubt who think Joel deserved what he got coming which he does MANY times throughout the play through. The ending scene is literally Joel and Ellie getting back on the right foot and gives a new outlook on why Ellie fought so hard to avenge him. The dynamic between the two changes a lot throughout i.e. Ellie's birthday and when Joel tells her the truth about the incident. Cohh fails to remember any of this, he is lazy when he says the story is done "in a different way" but is harder on the delivery of the story than the story itself so I won't press on this.
He is bigoted when addressing the comment "What do you think about people giving this game a 10/10". He asserts to like this game you have to put the good parts "on a pedestal" and just forget the bad ones... He complains about how people are polarized by the game and this is somehow a bad thing intrinsic to the game. The irony is Cohh states the game is objectively mediocre and rejects any other opinion of the game, so of course people who disagree are going to call you out like this and create this polarizing atmosphere because the fire was already started.
I ask Cohh to be less biased in future reviews and be open to discourse emerging from games, especially ones as innovative in storytelling as this.