Naughty Dog's The Last of Us trailer at E3 incited a lot of reactions that bordered on two polar extremes. Many were very positive, leading to commendment and even Best of E3 awards, but some struck a nerve; a very vocal nerve.
Roger Ebert is at it again and instead of battling armies of gamers who would like video games to be recognized as art, this time he's after one of Sony's most prized possessions. He posted the following on his Twitter account:
"The Last of Us," and other video games that leave absolutely nothing to the imagination. Boone is such a good writer.
What he is referring to is an article written by Steven Boone from Capital New York which labels The Last Of Us' E3 showing as just another violent game appealing to an audience lacking an attention span. Ebert had no trouble agreeing, and essentially agreed that The Last of Us defers to crude moments of action and an overly driven experience to keep its audience engaged.
Evan Wells, being the Co-President of Naughty Dog and mind behind flavorful games such as Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, was quick to respond and stated:
I've the utmost respect for @ebertchicago so I hope he takes another look @ #TheLastofUs b4 dismissing it. We're trying something different.
The Last of Us really speaks for itself, but sometimes that isn't enough if someone isn't willing to listen. It wasn't how violent the demo at E3 was, it was how tangible and refined the presentation appeared that had people clapping louder than at any other moment of the show. Ebert might think that games can't be art, and that they don't evoke imagination, but to cut down one of the most ambitious in recent history based upon a short demo is an easy way to look uneducated.