If I learned anything during my years as a cinephile, it is that you must respect your audience’s time. As a game development studio, Naughty Dog borrows heavily from cinema to draw players in—and should therefore be held to the same standard of discipline. Before going any further, I want to make one thing clear: The Last of Us Part II is far too long.
This flaw bleeds into nearly every aspect of the experience, save for the audiovisual presentation, which remains extraordinary—perhaps even timeless.
The first game, The Last of Us (2013), distilled an entire year of trauma and survival into a taut, exquisitely paced 13–16 hour journey. By contrast, the bulk of Part II unfolds over only three in-game days, stretched into a 30–35 hour ordeal. What should feel like a tightening spiral instead becomes a slog. By the end, I felt drained, disconnected, and relieved—not moved—to finally be finished.
A PATCHWORK STORY
This is a revenge tale as old as scripture, presented as though it offers radical new insight. It does not. The impression I’m left with is that Naughty Dog’s reputation for strong writing granted its storytellers unchecked authority. If a five-minute scene is desired, the world bends to accommodate it—regardless of pacing or necessity.
The worst misstep arrives halfway through: a ten-hour narrative detour introduced at precisely the wrong moment, designed to reframe a single character. It fails. The newly introduced cast is bland and interchangeable, their relationships inert. The entire sequel contains one moment of raw, undeniable power—and it occurs in the prologue.
Worse still, the story applies its moral logic inconsistently. Violence is condemned in one moment, excused in another, depending on who commits it and why. The result is a narrative that neither fully embraces nihilism nor meaningfully interrogates it. One is left wondering why this story needed to be told at all—especially at such bloated length.
STEALTH, COMBAT, WORLD - A COMPLETE PACKAGE
That said, the environmental storytelling remains strong. Seattle is hauntingly beautiful in decay—roots tearing through asphalt, nature reclaiming abandoned structures. Optional notes and recordings tell intimate, tragic stories that often prove more compelling than the main plot itself.
The irony is brutal: the gameplay systems and world-building are excellent, but they are shackled to a story that actively undermines them. Instead of supporting one another, narrative and gameplay exist in opposition.
By the end, the contradiction is impossible to ignore. You are asked to condemn violence after committing hundreds of killings. You are asked to empathize after being emotionally bludgeoned into submission. Gameplay and cinematics tell incompatible stories.
I admire much of what this game achieves: its atmosphere, its tension, its technical mastery. I despise how relentlessly it lectures, how little trust it places in the player’s capacity for reflection, and how it dismantles beloved characters in service of a message it cannot articulate coherently.
I appreciate that the game sparked debate—something rare and valuable. But I resent the self-importance with which it does so. Love is impossible here. So is indifference. The experience oscillates endlessly between admiration and frustration, never attempting to reconcile the two.
And that, ultimately, is what I find hardest to forgive.












Comments
Post a Comment