Currently Online 
A critic's opinion is still just an opinion.
Quarter to Three had this to say about the Last of Us: "If you accept that the pedestrian stealth/shooter gameplay in The Last of Us is the least important part of the experience, despite the long hours struggling and restruggling with it, you might conclude that this is a remarkable game. But if you come to dread every encounter for dragging out the time it takes to get to the good parts, if you divvy up the time spent on the good parts and the time spent on the parts where you could have been playing a better game, what happens when you get a roughly one to ten ratio? Is a remarkable story buried under hours of non-remarkable game actually a good game?"
Should we consider this a "cold hard fact"? Of course not, it's just one guy's opinion; a legitimate opinion, but still a subjective take, not a fact.
