Compare Avowed vs The Last of Us Part II Remastered

Reviewers noted useful accessibility and comfort controls such as camera, subtitle, difficulty, and arachnophobia-related options, though colorblind support was called out as missing.

Accessibility options were strongly praised, with reviewers calling the expanded descriptive audio, speech-to-vibration, and broader tools meaningful additions.

One reviewer specifically framed Avowed as more appropriate for older teens and adults because of its complex themes and mature material.

Age appropriateness was limited by the game’s mature themes, violence, and emotional weight, with one reviewer saying younger players may not appreciate it.

Enemy AI was considered serviceable but not especially smart; later impressions suggested fights remain engaging without feeling brain-dead.

AI behavior was praised in combat-focused reviews for swarming, faction pressure, and strong arena behavior.

Aiming and first-person spell placement drew criticism when ground-targeted abilities were hard to place precisely.

Aiming precision received specific praise on PC, where mouse input gave reviewers strong control for headshots.

Animation feedback was mixed, with stiff NPCs and less impressive presentation keeping the game from feeling fully modern.

Most reviewers praised the bold, colorful, alien fantasy art direction, though a few disliked the cartoony look or felt presentation was uneven.

Art direction was praised as visually striking, though one review also noted the remaster could look too dark in places.

The Living Lands’ vivid tone, music, and dreamlike spaces were repeatedly praised for creating a distinctive atmosphere.

Atmosphere was praised as masterful, especially for its oppressive tension and survival-horror mood.

Boss design was criticized as disappointing, with bosses feeling like tougher versions of regular enemies rather than unique encounters.

Boss design stood out in one PC review, which highlighted major fights as some of Naughty Dog’s best.

Bug reports varied widely: some reviewers found almost none, while others hit quest bugs, map-edge bugs, or issues that required reloads.

Bug frequency was mixed: some PC reviewers reported minor UI or texture glitches, while others found the port clean.

Camera-related options were appreciated, especially the ability to adjust head bob and camera shake for comfort.

Character creation was generally praised as solid or deep, with later updates adding more races and appearance options.

Character development split reviewers: some found companions distinct and engaging, while others thought characters were bland or hard to care about.

Character development was praised for its heavy character work and risky perspective structure.

The companion roster was often seen as small or limited, though some reviewers still liked the four supporting characters.

The character roster in No Return was praised for bringing secondary characters forward with different loadouts, traits, and playstyles.

Build and class flexibility was praised because Avowed lets players mix archetypes freely, though balance sometimes favored magic or specific styles.

Combat was one of the most consistently praised elements, especially magic, responsiveness, and build variety, despite repetition and gear-gating complaints.

Combat was one of the strongest areas overall, with reviewers praising its brutal feel, polish, resource pressure, and ability to shine in No Return despite a few dissenting takes.

Companion combat AI was mixed: some found companions self-sufficient or improved by patches, while others called them weak or unnecessary in fights.

Reviewers liked the dense zones and amount of side content, although some felt the scope was restrained rather than sprawling.

Content variety was broadly praised, especially No Return, Lost Levels, commentary, guitar free play, skins, speedrun tools, and modifiers, though some extras were called short or uneven.

Controls and combat feel were commonly praised for responsiveness, impact, and keybind flexibility, with a few targeting frustrations.

Controls were usually described as smooth, responsive, and solid, with PC mouse-and-keyboard support adding precision for some players.

The core loop was divisive: strong combat and exploration were often undermined for some reviewers by gear-tier repetition and open-zone structure.

The No Return loop was praised as a high-stakes, rewarding way to experience the game’s encounters repeatedly.

Crafting was mixed to negative, with several reviewers calling it threadbare, expensive, or too tied to gear-tier progression.

Crafting was praised as part of the game’s excellent survival-combat foundation.

Crash stability varied by platform and version: some reviewers reported no crashes, while another had severe startup crashes before fixes.

Dialogue quality ranged from standout and well acted to overly wordy, forced, or limited in the options it offered.

Difficulty balance was one of the most debated areas, with some finding it fair and flexible and others criticizing gear checks, sponginess, or uneven scaling.

Difficulty was usually viewed positively as tense and intentional, with challenge options and survival pressure fitting the game’s design.

Resource balance divided reviewers: some liked the meaningful economy, while others felt crafting materials and upgrade resources were too scarce.

Resource balance was praised for keeping ammo and materials scarce enough to make survival tense.

Emotional impact came mostly from moral choices, consequences, and companion moments, though some endings or fallout felt muted to critics.

Emotional impact was extremely strong, with reviewers repeatedly describing the story as gutting, heartbreaking, or emotionally shattering.

Endgame content was criticized because the original experience did not allow continued post-story play and lacked New Game Plus at launch.

Enemy variety was a recurring concern; many reviewers felt the same bears, spiders, skeletons, and humanoids appeared too often.

Enemy variety was mixed: No Return adds faction variety and AI pressure, but one reviewer criticized the limited number of new enemies.

Environmental detail was strongly praised through dense secrets, vistas, caves, and handcrafted spaces, even by some otherwise mixed reviewers.

Environmental detail drew strong praise for scenery, foliage, world texture, and dense visual craftsmanship.

Exploration was one of the strongest consensus positives, with dense maps, secrets, vertical paths, and constant rewards keeping reviewers engaged.

Exploration was generally valued for scavenging, optional environmental stories, and player choice, though one reviewer found it sometimes too guided.

Facial animations were criticized in later impressions as not matching next-generation expectations.

Facial animation was praised as industry-leading and central to the emotional performances.

Returning Eora fans often felt Avowed was faithful to the Pillars of Eternity world, while still accessible to newcomers.

Family friendliness scored low because one reviewer explicitly described the game as gritty, intense, and extremely violent.

Fast travel was viewed as convenient and generous, making it easy to revisit areas without friction.

Frame-rate stability varied: some reviewers saw stable performance, while others reported hitches, drops, screen tearing, or stuttering.

Frame rate stability was mostly praised, especially in performance mode, with some caveats around 30fps fidelity mode and certain PC scenes.

Fun factor leaned positive overall, especially for combat and exploration, though some reviewers found the experience merely solid or underwhelming.

Fun factor was strongest in No Return and combat-focused extras, though the main story’s grim tone made it less relaxing for some reviewers.

Gameplay mechanics were generally praised as streamlined and flexible, but a few reviewers felt RPG systems lacked depth or reactivity.

Gameplay mechanics drew mixed responses: several reviewers liked the remastered combat tools, but one felt the core stealth-loot-shoot loop had aged poorly.

Graphics quality was divisive but often positive, with praise for stunning vistas and vivid visuals alongside criticism of poor or compromised visuals on some platforms.

Graphics were widely praised as excellent or stunning, but reviewers often stressed that the jump over the PS4/PS5-patched version is modest.

Grind level was a common complaint tied to gear upgrades, resource hunting, and spongy combat loops.

Steam Deck suitability was considered playable and verified, but the visual tradeoff was significant.

Handheld suitability was praised in one PC review because the Steam Deck version ran well enough to deserve verification.

Haptic support was platform-dependent: one PS5 review praised DualSense vibration, while another noted missing haptic and trigger use.

Haptic feedback integration was strongly praised for bows, weapons, bandaging, traversal, and added immersion, though one reviewer found extended use tiring.

Horror tension was praised for causing anxiety, dread, and memorable scare sequences.

HUD clarity improved through options to reduce clutter, adjust opacity, and toggle display elements.

Immersion was helped by dense worldbuilding and atmosphere but hurt for some by static NPCs and limited world reactivity.

Innovation was usually described as limited; reviewers saw Avowed as confident and enjoyable rather than genre-changing.

Innovation was limited in one review, which found No Return fun but not especially unique as a mode.

Learning support was helped by reference and lore systems that made Eora’s terminology easier to understand.

Level design was praised for verticality, density, handcrafted routes, and spaces that felt larger than their footprint.

Level design received strong praise from one reviewer for making linear spaces feel flexible and meaningful.

Post-launch support was viewed positively, with free updates improving stability, customization, build options, and quality-of-life features.

Load times were consistently praised as much faster and a clear quality-of-life upgrade.

Loot opinions were mixed: unique items and progression could be satisfying, but many chests and rewards felt predictable or unexciting.

Lore depth was consistently praised, especially the in-game books, history, politics, and reference systems that made Eora feel rich.

Map and navigation design was mixed, with missing custom markers criticized before later updates added them.

Map and navigation design drew one notable complaint about unclear progression paths in naturalistic environments.

Menu and ability-wheel usability was mixed; some quality-of-life systems helped, but radial wheels and limited hotkeys disrupted combat for others.

Mission design drew criticism when quests felt repetitive, fetchy, or like back-and-forth errands, though some standout missions remained.

Mission variety in No Return was praised for randomized objectives and encounter types, with some caveats about uneven encounters.

Movement feel and parkour were strongly praised for making exploration fluid, vertical, and enjoyable.

Narrative quality was usually a strength thanks to mystery, choices, and world stakes, but some reviewers found the main plot predictable or underwhelming.

Narrative quality remained divisive but mostly positive, with many reviewers calling it profound or masterful while others criticized its structure, bleakness, and execution.

Onboarding was praised when it taught by doing, though lore-heavy openings could feel steep for newcomers.

Open-zone design split reviewers: many liked curated, dense hubs, while others found the world restrictive, lifeless, or not interactive enough.

The limited semi-open Seattle section stood out positively to one reviewer, who wished more of the game pursued that feeling.

Originality was limited; reviewers often described Avowed as familiar comfort-food fantasy rather than a bold genre evolution.

Originality was mixed, with one review finding No Return strange and unusual but artistically awkward.

Pacing was mixed, with slow starts, downtime, filler quests, and late-game repetition weighing against an otherwise easy-to-follow story.

Pacing was the most consistent structural complaint, with multiple reviewers saying the campaign felt long, bloated, or uneven despite strong moments.

Performance optimization varied sharply across versions, from stable and improved after patches to demanding, stuttery, or poorly optimized on some PCs.

Performance optimization was generally strong on PS5 and many PC setups, though one PC review reported stutter and texture issues.

Platform-specific support was praised for PS5 performance modes, Sony-platform feel, and PC features such as DLSS.

Platform-specific support was praised for PS5-native upgrades such as load times, DualSense features, and 3D audio.

Platforming precision was a pleasant surprise, with simple mantling and vertical puzzles adding a welcome exploration layer.

Polish improved over time but remained uneven, with reviewers citing jank, lack of gloss, or presentation limits alongside strong craftsmanship.

Polish was a consistent strength, with reviewers describing the package, presentation, and bonus modes as well-crafted.

Progression systems were divisive: some liked flexible builds and added points, while others found midgame growth stagnant or too gear-dependent.

Progression in No Return was praised for unlocks, challenges, and longer-term rewards that kept runs moving.

Protagonist appeal was mixed: Ellie was praised as carrying the sequel by some, while one reviewer found her harder to relate to.

Puzzles were generally light but appreciated when they used environmental elements, timing, and exploration paths.

Puzzle design was a weak point in one review, which complained that environmental puzzles were too few and underdeveloped.

Quest design ranged from excellent side stories and meaningful follow-ups to fetchy, inconsistent, or repetitive tasks.

Remaster quality was generally praised as a definitive or worthwhile edition, though the visual upgrade was often called modest and content-focused.

Replay value improved with choices and post-launch New Game Plus, though some reviewers felt repeated runs changed too little.

Replay value was one of the strongest remaster arguments, driven mainly by No Return, daily/custom runs, unlocks, and added extras.

Sandbox freedom was limited compared with full open-world RPGs, though some reviewers still appreciated freedom in story choices or builds.

No Return’s sandbox-like setup was praised as a fun way to experiment outside the campaign’s narrative constraints.

Save reliability was a concern for at least one reviewer who needed more careful saving because of bugs.

Side characters and companions were highly divisive: some found them memorable and heartfelt, while others thought they were shallow or uninspired.

Skill trees were praised for flexibility but criticized by others as simple, shallow, or uneven across archetypes.

Skill systems were split: one reviewer liked the upgrade satisfaction, while another felt No Return upgrades did not meaningfully change play enough.

Sound design was praised for impactful effects, combat feedback, and strong weapon audio.

Sound design was praised for 3D audio, directionality, anxiety, and stealth-tension cues.

Soundtrack reception was generally positive but often stopped short of calling the music unforgettable.

The soundtrack was praised as atmospheric and emotionally effective.

Stealth was criticized as underdeveloped or nearly useless, with little support for stealth-focused play.

Stealth mechanics were widely praised as tense, flexible, and improved, especially when No Return encouraged new approaches.

The tutorial was praised for teaching systems naturally and creating meaningful choices early.

Upgrade systems were sharply divisive, with some liking gear longevity and many others criticizing tiers, scarcity, or number-go-up design.

UI options such as text sizing and subtitles were appreciated as useful interface support.

User interface design had one PC-specific criticism, where mouse-related UI elements could hurt frame rate.

Value for money was mixed: reviewers praised Game Pass or lower pricing but questioned the original premium price for the scope.

Value for money was strongly positive for the $10 upgrade, with more mixed views for first-time or double-dip buyers at full price.

Visual effects, especially magic, were repeatedly praised for impact, color, and satisfying feedback.

Visual effects were mostly strong, but one PC review noted distracting upscaling artifacts around transparencies.

Voice acting was mostly praised as strong or outstanding, though one reviewer found performances unable to save weaker writing.

Voice acting earned unanimous praise from scored reviews, especially for the main cast’s performances.

Weapon balance and variety were mostly praised for experimentation and flexible loadouts, but some reviewers felt magic outclassed melee or guns.

World-building was one of Avowed’s clearest strengths, especially its politics, cultures, history, and Eora continuity.

World-building was praised for Seattle’s detail, environmental storytelling, and the way the sequel frames grief and factions.

World interactivity was one of the most common criticisms, with many reviewers finding NPCs, theft, objects, and systems too static.

Writing quality was widely praised for lore, companion dialogue, and sharp prose, but a minority found it wordy, pretentious, or mid.

Writing quality was polarized: several reviewers praised the ambitious, intentional storytelling, while one criticized the script as unsubtle.