Ludonarrative dissonance is the name of the game

>grab someone by the back
>gun to their head
>they yell
>kill them and learn to never use the human shield mechanic again
you don't see the problem in terms of gameplay cycle? Also it's not that far fetched, people turn obedient just for a tiny hope to survive.

>'killing is bad m'kay' plot
>player's main way of interacting with the world is killing
And then the game ends with the main character being fucked.

OP, in your own words, explain us what ludonarrative dissonance means.

That was a positive example

i think the ludonarrative dissonance for Death stranding would be more like
>killing bad
>throw multiple shitty TPS sections anyway for the easily impressed

Funny how they didn't actually make them both canon because you meat the protag in modern times in the end so you can't go UMMMM THE MEMORY IS FUZZY SO WHO KNOWS WHICH ONE IT WAS

Being fucked for a choice you couldn't not make. If you agree with the game's theme it still forces you to do things in gameplay that go against that theme, thus disconnecting the gameplay from the theme.

she could have chosen to go after abby or not, it's really that simple. And she didn't, cuz the game is linear that way.

>multiple shitty TPS sections
But those aren't people you're killing, just lost souls, and you're not even killing them

I think you could literally not let people go without killing them in TLOU, which is kind of fucked up

>she could have chosen
Good for her, but you're forced to do the killings with your hand. And then the game tells you murder bad. Well you fucking told me to do this, I had no choice

>spec ops
>why didn't the main character not do bad things, the player should be able to choose!
>hl2
>why didn't the main character not prevent the explosion, the player should be able to choose!
>TLOU1
>why didn't the main character not kill the scientists, the player should be able to choose!
sounds like zoomer problems mate

Except in spec ops you have the option of killing yourself in the end. So the game doesn't just shame you for the killing, it gives you an out, lets you absolve your sins in a way

that sounds gay as fuck

How are you not gathering from trailers and leaks that the protag is a murderous antihero? No one's forcing you to play the game.

Ludonarrative dissonance is a term pseudo-intellectuals came up with because calling it "cutscene Dante vs playable Dante" didn't sound too good.

Attached: maxresdefault(2).jpg (1280x720, 124.86K)

and you're implying then that ellie's ending is... fun for her? she chose violence and got punished, it's literature 101, holy shit dude get a grip.

You don't get it.

>why didn't the main character not prevent the explosion, the player should be able to choose!
Wasn't within his power. And yes, every time the protag CHOOSES to do something you don't want to do as a player, that disconnects you from the protagonist and the story. It's not a film, protag isn't just some guy, I have to be the one bringing his stupid fucking ideas to life, I need to agree with him or it won't work as a game

you might agree with the game's message but the player character at that time doesn't.

You know when Nathan Drake kills like 600 people in gameplay, but he's still considered a hero, despite him putting himself in situations where he "has to kill" these people. That's where the term comes from

Then the only one who can learn that violence is bad is the main character, not the player. That's what happens when you treat your videogame like a film

kek

Ever felt weird when in a cutscene the characters whine about having to kill 1 person, after you just killed 100s of people to get to that cutscene?

Did she absolve her sins or just waddle away into the sunset? In spec ops the game throws guilt at you, gives you a gun and asks you what the fuck you're going to do with that guilt, are you killing yourself or not. Ultimately the player is in control of whether or not the protagonist remains as the bad guy or kills self.

I'm sorry but this really just sounds like "game bad because character flawed". If that's a nono for you, don't buy the game.

you need to learn from vidya that violence is bad? I'm not the one who talked about Spec Ops but I'm just throwing this in here: Killing yourself after doing bad shit doesn't absolve you. People will still spit on your grave. The acts are done. You're still the bad guy.

I'm forced to bring the character to life by controlling him in the game. If we don't agree on what the fuck we're supposed to be doing, it won't work out, that's what the fuck ludonarrative dissonance is, how is this a new concept for you. If the protagonist wants to kill a doctor and I don't, but the game still tells me I need to do it, I will do it, but at that very moment the story of the game will fall apart for me. If the protagonist wants to act retarded, he should do it in a cutscene rather than forcing my hand

The surgeon death in TLOU1 is fucking stupid, he never attacks you no matter how close you get, and shooting him in the foot with a arrow will kill him. Should've just made it a cutscene death if they're going to be that faggy about it.

>every time the protag CHOOSES to do something you don't want to do as a player, that disconnects you from the protagonist and the story
holy shit mate if you don't like the story don't buy the game, this isn't ludnoarrative dissonance

You should stick to VNs and harem anime.

Kojima wins again

>naughty dog games so bad mixing gameplay and story that this is the second time they bring up the issue of ludo narrative dissonance
It happened in Uncharted, and now it happens in TLOU

There should be some level of unpredicatbility. I'm playing RDR2 now and you get literally punished for going off the roads.
>grab someone
>use him as a human shield not holding your gun to his head
>kill everyone else
>he still waits to get gutted
I know video games "in game" rarely look that glorious as in the preset videos but it is more noticeable when a game is otherwise high quality.

>You're still the bad guy
But at least you acknowledge that you were wrong. Game gives you an out. When the game shames you for things it told you to do and then just spits in your face and rolls credits, that's a fuck you to the audience. You told me to do this, fuck you not me

>gardening game
>but i don't like gardening
>what ludonarrative dissonance!
>rape hentai game
>i don't like rape
>ludonarrative dissonance

ludonarrative dissonance is a question of the world making sense, not a question of how you feel about the plot

I didn't, why the fuck would I buy this shit game. Let me guess, your next line is "don't talk about it if you didn't buy it". See how you're just trying to shut me up no matter if I played it or not

>When the game shames you for things it told you to do and then just spits in your face and rolls credits, that's a fuck you to the audience.
Basically this

isn't the fact that the main characters you play as see story consequences for their player's actions literally ludonarrative consistency?

the thing that made Zig Forums the most angry about this game is literally the thing that keeps it the most consistent with its own message. neil & co clearly know what they're doing, i'm excited to play it.

More like

>gardening game
>you do gardening
>at the end the game tells you "gardening is bad and you should feel bad"

ludo means play
narrative means story
it's two very simple words, I can't tell if people are intenionally pretending to be dense or what

>ludonarrative dissonance is a question of the world making sense
No it literally is not. It's whether or not the story and the gameplay align. If the story tells you that you need to save the world right now but gameplay gives you an incentive to build a farm and have a wife, that's ludonarrative dissonance. Now you know

I'd let you talk if you had a point mate, but all you're saying is "i don't agree with the MC's decisions so it's ludonarrative dissonance". The story DOESN'T fall apart just because you don't stand by their choice.

Can you not read or are you actually just retarded?

you attaching yourself to the main character is a point for naughty dog lol, they give ellie and joel a bunch of abilities and you enjoy using them (or maybe you don't lol) but the point is to say "yes we made a game about killing, if it were real life how would the events play out in story?" and i would say karma's a bitch probably.

nope, bad analogy, because it's not a secret throughout the game, there's no hidden plotpoint about gardening being bad, Ellie and Joel know they're killing people and their stance is different from yours.

also the only kill they punish you for in pt ii is a kill you couldn't finish the first game without doing. plenty consistent if you ask me.

if you're playing a character who doesn't give a shit about saving the world, then it's NOT. HOLY SHIT THIS IS TIRING.

Can you use arguments rather than quips? This isn't reddit, you won't be upvoted. Win an argument using arguments or consider suicide

Ludo Narrative Disonnace is not "character do thing I don't agree with." It means the gameplay elements of the game, and the story do not align. Uncharted was always the big example, Nathan Drake kills hundreds of people in that game, yet the game's story never ever brings this up. Nathan never talks about his killings, and if he does its considered comedic. He could walk away anytime, a reasonable person would after encountering gun holding looters, but he keeps going and going and going. It's not even self defence anymore.

You are calling user wrong, then proceed to repeat his exact answer as proof that he is wrong. So either you can't read, or you are retarded.

>The story DOESN'T fall apart just because you don't stand by their choice
Like I said, if their choice is in a cutscene, that's fine. If the game tells me to do something I don't want to do and then blames me for doing it, that's fucking stupid. Case in point: killing the doctors in TLOU1. If he killed them in a cutscene, I would have no problem. That's his decision. My decision would've been not to kill them.

Your argument was
>gardening game
>but i don't like gardening
my argument is
>gardening game
>but the story tells you you need to save the world rather than do gardening
What are you talking about

>you need to learn from vidya that violence is bad?
That's not the point. If the only one who gets their moral bias challenged is the fictional character, there's no difference from a film. Videogames have the capability to make the player feel those feelings for themselves, not as an empathetic mechanism for some character on the screen.
Whatever point a developer wants to make through his game, it should be delivered to the player directly. If you're telling your player to have fun killing people while you show in some cutscenes how fucked up the main character is due to all the killing, you're making a narrative and game experience for the fictional character.

OP or whoever is still going against what everyone's saying, read this mate. Uncharted has ludonarrative dissonance. An aspect of ludonarrative dissonance is doing shit the player character wouldn't actually do. Like, doing a fishing minigame in the middle of a city on fire. The antihero killing people, while the player and everyone around says it's wrong, is not ludonarrative dissonance.

It's hard to realize that the words you already know can be combined to mean new things, unless it's a catchy portmanteau

Ludonarrative dissonance doesn't matter. People bitching about it are like autists complaining they couldn't revive Aerith with Phoenix Downs.

>ludonarrative dissonance is a question of the world making sense, not a question of how you feel about the plot
Learn to read. You are arguing against your own argument.

For the last time, Phoenix Down works on people who are knocked out. Not dead

nitpicky as fuck, mate. There's no difference whether or not you kill Andrew Ryan in a cutscene or if you click the mouse to make the golf club move.

I'm losing my mind trying to explain this so I'm out mate

Attached: 1570793637672.jpg (540x540, 45.71K)

ah yes a semantic argument, the last cope of the wrong

>two different statements are the same
>I will give no proofs of this
Just repeat this 10 more times then, that's how you win an argument. Don't try to actually use argument

OP, ludonarrative dissonance is not whether or not the player has the choice to stop the MC making mistakes.

I'd say it's more of an issue of the story not really having a message that sits well. Joel kills doctor to save Ellie from dying. Abby kills Joel for killing her father. Ellie tries to kill Abby for Killing Joel. But you have to play as Abby after seeing her kill the person who you played as in the first game. Any ludonarrative issues would come from the fact that now you have to play as someone who has been presented as the antagonist from the perspective of first game and a portion of the second and being told "wait, see, this person isn't actually that bad, you'll like them eventually". But you're not going to want to like them because they killed off a person you liked and played as and beat the shit out of the other person you liked and played as. Just giving a sad backstory isn't going to make it better and some people aren't going to be able to get into the narrative and will be wanting Abby to die or have bad things happen, as the story has shown you that bad people will get their comeuppance eventually.

If the entire next game was based on shaming you for killing Andrew Ryan, it makes a lot of difference