The Last of Us Part II

[Vakir]

@Fencers

Your criticisms are pretty much my own, well broken down and a balanced take.

Only thing I'd really add is - well, it's telling that the last couple of pages is still debating the ending of last game. Meanwhile, there isn't nearly as much nuanced discussion that I'm seeing about the decisions being made in the sequel. It's a binary "this was a beautifully told narrative" or "I don't like the way they portrayed certain actions/characters."

The decision made at the end of the first Last of Us was deliberately meant to invite controversy and discussion about intent vs. outcome, the morality of the decision Joel made, how shitty of a person Joel was (since him being at least somewhat shitty is undeniable), how negatively it would impact Ellie's survivors guilt and if he doomed her relationship with him, etc.

The smash to credits was a huge underscore of plausibility of so many different things. We're left with ambiguity in the pit of our stomach that will never truly be resolved. Except...it did. :/

After wrestling with it, I think that's why I just can't get behind a lot of this, regardless of the inciting incident feeling so contrived: Everyone and their mom said something to the effect of, when TLOU's credits rolled, "Yeah, but those Fireflies also probably had a son/daughter!" "Yeah, but how many family figures are you dooming with this decision?" "How much have you ruined the life of this girl by doing this? Can you even have the same relationship you valued now that you did this to preserve it?" It invited a lot of perspective and it's built on things unseen and unspoken.

TLOU asks questions that feel bold by not being answered, holding up a mirror to the anxiety of survivor's guilt and the moral relativity of selfishness in a cold world...aaaaand TLOU2 promptly uses canon to answer them. And I just don't really dig that decision. Maybe I just didn't want a sequel with these characters as much as I thought I did. And...maybe that was their intention all along. MGS2 did a lot of the same thing to criticize our understanding and interpretation of an inherent anti-war series. "Why the fuck do you want to fight again after he walked away into Alaska vowing not to anymore?"

[Kolvarg]

Guys, mystery solved, the real reason why the game got such high ratings right here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpFVUR7PHLE&t=49s

when the concept of walking a little back and puzzle solving is this hard, you gotta make game options that can make it that easy or you'll get a 2/10 because someone can't figure out where a ladder goes.

Or you know, it's for people like this:

As A Gamer Without Sight, I've completed The Last Of Us Part II entirely without sighted assistance. (Reddit)

[Tech614]

Or you know, it's for people like this:

As A Gamer Without Sight, I've completed The Last Of Us Part II entirely without sighted assistance. (Reddit)

It's quite sickening people are making a joke about accessibility options that allow disabled gamers to enjoy a game. Every game should be doing this and be applauded for it, anyone trying to make a joke about it is beyond hope.

[PaladinSum]

Or you know, it's for people like this:

As A Gamer Without Sight, I've completed The Last Of Us Part II entirely without sighted assistance. (Reddit)

Accessibility options for people with low vision/colorblindness, physical manipulation issues and hearing isn't the same as turning off gameplay.

Making it where stealth is idiotproof isn't the same as helping a guy with one hand play.

Appreciate your love effort bellyaching because you don't like "journalists" being mocked.

[Kolvarg]

Accessibility options for people with low vision/colorblindness, physical manipulation issues and hearing isn't the same as turning off gameplay.

Making it where stealth is idiotproof isn't the same as helping a guy with one hand play.

Appreciate your love effort bellyaching because you don't like "journalists" being mocked.

I couldn't care less about journalists being mocked. If anything I'm just tired of the constant over-use of edgy meme mockery against everything and anything nowadays. But if you cared to spend 1 minute giving any thought to what you're replying to, you'd see the "idiotproof stealth" was part of the features that allowed this person to play.

You have a particular taste for making up in your head what other people think/say don't you? I really don't see the point in your activity in a forum like this if you're just constantly replying to the strawmans you create yourself. Don't get me wrong, we all do such things every now and then. But literally almost every post I see from you either completely misses or ignores the point it's replying to, and goes off on a tangent against an hyperbolic position that at best resembles a mere caricature of what you're replying to.

As I've suggested before, a blog probably suits you better.

[Tech614]

I couldn't care less about journalists being mocked. If anything I'm just tired of the constant over-use of edgy meme mockery against everything and anything nowadays. But if you cared to spend 1 minute giving any thought to what you're replying to, you'd see the "idiotproof stealth" was part of the features that allowed this person to play.

You have a particular taste for making up in your head what other people think/say don't you? I really don't see the point in your activity in a forum like this if you're just constantly replying to the strawmans you create yourself. Don't get me wrong, we all do such things every now and then. But literally almost every post I see from you either completely misses or ignores the point it's replying to, and goes off on a tangent against an hyperbolic position that at best resembles a mere caricature of what you're replying to.

As I've suggested before, a blog probably suits you better.

It is an obvious burner account I threw on ignore the first time they posted in this thread. New mmo-champion user who's first post is in TLOU2 thread? Yea totally believable lol.

But yea the weird ass gate keeping in video games needs to end. Accessibility is not a bad thing, and they are there for the people that need those options not the people who don't.

[PaladinSum]

I couldn't care less about journalists being mocked. If anything I'm just tired of the constant over-use of edgy meme mockery against everything and anything nowadays. But if you cared to spend 1 minute giving any thought to what you're replying to, you'd see the "idiotproof stealth" was part of the features that allowed this person to play.

You have a particular taste for making up in your head what other people think/say don't you? I really don't see the point in your activity in a forum like this if you're just constantly replying to the strawmans you create yourself. Don't get me wrong, we all do such things every now and then. But literally almost every post I see from you either completely misses or ignores the point it's replying to, and goes off on a tangent against an hyperbolic position that at best resembles a mere caricature of what you're replying to.

As I've suggested before, a blog probably suits you better.

I don't care about you fake apathy. You were always being disregarded when you tried to "You just don't get it" to get rid of my opinion. So, I personally don't care how you feel.

[Gigantique]

Well, Naughty Dog sure underestimated how much of an impact the Joel killing would have. Disastrously so, if my social circles are any metric.

While their efforts to make me empathise with Abby were borderline delivered with the subtetly of a sledgehammer to the face at times, it stood no chance at repairing the heinous act she had already done to a character I cared for deeply. If they had given me time to know Abby and empathise for half the game before making her kill Joel I'd probably applaud the shit out of them, because I'd have two characters I cared for come to blows. But killing Joel with a bunch of nobodies and retroactively trying to make me care about their shit?

Nah bro, I just vengefully enjoyed their deaths, while feeling sad at how perfect each Ellie/Joel flashback was, as that's what I wanted out of this game (or just new toons all together).

By the time the gameplay shifted to Abby my girlfriend even asked me why she all of a sudden was the one that had to ask if we should play some more, as before that I'd usually be the one to suggest it while playing as Ellie. I just didn't give a shit about Abby past flinging her headfirst into the nearest clicker at the start. (Also, the death animation from those big bois with a hammer was perfection)

Eventually finished the game to a spectacular meh. Even the girlfriend who was my opposite and didn't really care for Joel found it extremely lame and out of touch with our previous actions.

I also have to chuckle at the people in here making subtle claims about needing to get rid of <insert X> or appreciate it the "right" way to understand or like the story. Stories are subjective af, and when you have this big a portion of the playerbase that loathed the choices made, you done fucked up your sequel.

Some in my friends discord is waiting for my thoughts on the game before buying it, and it's a shame I'm gonna have to suggest them to not get it, because everything else in this game is TLoU 1 but cranked up to borderline perfection.

10/10 on Ellie barricading doors behind her in case someone follows, even though I surgically detached everything in that area from their lives though!

[Edge-]

Accessibility options for people with low vision/colorblindness, physical manipulation issues and hearing isn't the same as turning off gameplay.

Making it where stealth is idiotproof isn't the same as helping a guy with one hand play.

Appreciate your love effort bellyaching because you don't like "journalists" being mocked.

Not at all, it's gatekeeping garbage and utter nonsense. Accessibility options are fantastic, and I wish every game had them.

Case in point: Uncharted 4.

I just beat it, and I used the autoaim option. Why? Because I suck at aiming with gamepads, like, I'm utterly useless at it. And frankly, I don't really care to get good at it, because if I'm gonna be playing shooters it'll be on PC where I'm not completely awful.

But I still wanted to play the story and not fight against hating the gunplay. And it was great. Enjoyed the hell outta the game, the auto-aim was never "optimal" in the slightest and I'd be shooting the cover an enemy was behind rather than the upper part of their torso sticking out, but it worked great. If it wasn't there, I'd probably have gotten as frustrated as I did playing the first Uncharted and quite partway through.

Good lord, is this what we're at now? Mocking reviewers who may have never used those options or mocking the existence of those options which can allow people with disabilities to enjoy the experience?

[Jastall]

Well, Naughty Dog sure underestimated how much of an impact the Joel killing would have. Disastrously so, if my social circles are any metric.

While their efforts to make me empathise with Abby were borderline delivered with the subtetly of a sledgehammer to the face at times, it stood no chance at repairing the heinous act she had already done to a character I cared for deeply. If they had given me time to know Abby and empathise for half the game before making her kill Joel I'd probably applaud the shit out of them, because I'd have two characters I cared for come to blows. But killing Joel with a bunch of nobodies and retroactively trying to make me care about their shit?

Nah bro, I just vengefully enjoyed their deaths, while feeling sad at how perfect each Ellie/Joel flashback was, as that's what I wanted out of this game (or just new toons all together).

By the time the gameplay shifted to Abby my girlfriend even asked me why she all of a sudden was the one that had to ask if we should play some more, as before that I'd usually be the one to suggest it while playing as Ellie. I just didn't give a shit about Abby past flinging her headfirst into the nearest clicker at the start. (Also, the death animation from those big bois with a hammer was perfection)

Eventually finished the game to a spectacular meh. Even the girlfriend who was my opposite and didn't really care for Joel found it extremely lame and out of touch with our previous actions.

I also have to chuckle at the people in here making subtle claims about needing to get rid of <insert X> or appreciate it the "right" way to understand or like the story. Stories are subjective af, and when you have this big a portion of the playerbase that loathed the choices made, you done fucked up your sequel.

Some in my friends discord is waiting for my thoughts on the game before buying it, and it's a shame I'm gonna have to suggest them to not get it, because everything else in this game is TLoU 1 but cranked up to borderline perfection.

10/10 on Ellie barricading doors behind her in case someone follows, even though I surgically detached everything in that area from their lives though!

I do think the biggest flaw of the story was the writers underestimating how much of an impact this scene would have. Which is weird, considering he was plastered all over the marketing and they took the time to craft entire sequences showcasing how much of a cool character he could be... after his death; the one in the museum is a prime example.

Generally I feel this game's story is a lot more directionless than the far, far more focused TLOU 1. I'd have liked to be a fly on the wall of the writer's room, for I suspect a bitter war was waged there.

[Gelannerai]

Not at all, it's gatekeeping garbage and utter nonsense. Accessibility options are fantastic, and I wish every game had them.

Case in point: Uncharted 4.

I just beat it, and I used the autoaim option. Why? Because I suck at aiming with gamepads, like, I'm utterly useless at it. And frankly, I don't really care to get good at it, because if I'm gonna be playing shooters it'll be on PC where I'm not completely awful.

But I still wanted to play the story and not fight against hating the gunplay. And it was great. Enjoyed the hell outta the game, the auto-aim was never "optimal" in the slightest and I'd be shooting the cover an enemy was behind rather than the upper part of their torso sticking out, but it worked great. If it wasn't there, I'd probably have gotten as frustrated as I did playing the first Uncharted and quite partway through.

Good lord, is this what we're at now? Mocking reviewers who may have never used those options or mocking the existence of those options which can allow people with disabilities to enjoy the experience?

Agreed, accessibility options should never be derided. TLoU2 has plenty of flaws and merits that can be legitimately critiqued, but that isn’t one of them.

[PaladinSum]

Not at all, it's gatekeeping garbage and utter nonsense. Accessibility options are fantastic, and I wish every game had them.

Case in point: Uncharted 4.

I just beat it, and I used the autoaim option. Why? Because I suck at aiming with gamepads, like, I'm utterly useless at it. And frankly, I don't really care to get good at it, because if I'm gonna be playing shooters it'll be on PC where I'm not completely awful.

But I still wanted to play the story and not fight against hating the gunplay. And it was great. Enjoyed the hell outta the game, the auto-aim was never "optimal" in the slightest and I'd be shooting the cover an enemy was behind rather than the upper part of their torso sticking out, but it worked great. If it wasn't there, I'd probably have gotten as frustrated as I did playing the first Uncharted and quite partway through.

Good lord, is this what we're at now? Mocking reviewers who may have never used those options or mocking the existence of those options which can allow people with disabilities to enjoy the experience?

Well, yes. It's perfectly fine to mock games journalist and their syncophants. Especially when they have the audacity to mention gatekeeping while saying only their reviews matter.

Or give a game a 2/10 because they're so terrible at video games a simple collect-a-thon platformer is giving them a headache.

Why should gamers be listening to the opinions of people so very shit at video games? And why should I treat you with respect when you compared being a total failure at games to ACTUAL DISABILITIES?!

The face of games journalism, ladies and gents.

[Edge-]

Well, yes. It's perfectly fine to mock games journalist and their syncophants.

You watched them play the game? All 100+ of them? How many said they they played through using those options, specifically?

Because short of you being there to see or them writing they used them, you're making shit up because it fits your narrative. It's garbage.

Especially when they have the audacity to mention gatekeeping while saying only their reviews matter.

What you posted is gatekeeping 101. Period. "People don't deserve to play the game if they need an easymode option." followed by a baseless allegation that that's what gaming media used.

The face of games journalism, ladies and gents.

You do you, buddy. Just don't gatekeep, the gaming community (and really all fandoms) could use a whole lot less of that garbage.

[PaladinSum]

You watched them play the game? All 100+ of them? How many said they they played through using those options, specifically?

Because short of you being there to see or them writing they used them, you're making shit up because it fits your narrative. It's garbage.



What you posted is gatekeeping 101. Period. "People don't deserve to play the game if they need an easymode option." followed by a baseless allegation that that's what gaming media used.



Good lord, the depths to which people think they understand something while literally not having the foggiest clue is breathtaking. Like, I'm astounded.

You do you, buddy. Just don't gatekeep, the gaming community (and really all fandoms) could use a whole lot less of that garbage.

Okay, person musing about bigotry when talking about a reddit posting memes. You keep up your gatekeeping of only valuing the opinion of certain people like I do (Spoiler: I can respect individual people who call themselves journalists. You represent the smug attitude that needs to vanish.) and pretending everyone that dislikes the game as some bigot.

Also. There's a difference between playing games casually and being paid to voice your opinion on games. I don't give a fuck if someone who plays two games a year wants enemies that can't flank. One would think you'd want a fucking baseline of skill to have an occupation involving video games.

[Kolvarg]

Well, Naughty Dog sure underestimated how much of an impact the Joel killing would have. Disastrously so, if my social circles are any metric.

Nah bro, I just vengefully enjoyed their deaths, while feeling sad at how perfect each Ellie/Joel flashback was, as that's what I wanted out of this game (or just new toons all together).

I also have to chuckle at the people in here making subtle claims about needing to get rid of <insert X> or appreciate it the "right" way to understand or like the story. Stories are subjective af, and when you have this big a portion of the playerbase that loathed the choices made, you done fucked up your sequel.

Of course stories are subjective. But it doesn't change the fact that there is a clear intention behind the story and how it's told. And the fact that you and many people were unable to see past that death, does not erase it. Of course, it also doesn't change that you didn't enjoy it much, that is fair, but I don't think it makes it a bad story, much less a bad game. To me, it would be like saying Hamlet sucks because he is constantly willingly ignoring opportunities to avenge his father (random example, not comparing or saying they are at the same level in any way).

While I was playing, and soon after finishing, I had the same feeling that they should have just made us play as Abby first. Or even have Abby's part as a "2nd run" option, Resident Evil 2 style. But thinking back on it, I think it would probably not have helped much. If anything it would have made it worse. The reason you play first as Ellie, and the reason that death happens in the very beginning, is that they want you to hate Abby. They want you to mirror exactly what Ellie is feeling about her. Not through empathy towards Ellie, but by genuinely and personally caring about that death. You, the player, are not Ellie. You have zero influence on what choices she makes in the story. But the way the story it's told, they first make you hate her for personal reasons, and then they try to let you see that perspective matters. Not by telling you or even showing you, but by making you experience it. They want you to go through a similar emotional progression, from blindly hating her, to understanding her and what she did, to potentially even liking her as a character.

Abby is objectively not a villain in any way, she's just as nuanced as Ellie or Joel. Of course you might still not care, but it doesn't change the fact that it is that way. And again, it does that not just by showing it, but by making you experience it.

I think the biggest "sin" this game commits, is going through all that trouble to challenge/test the player, and not reflect it in any way. I understand that the game can't really have drastically different endings especially considering there might be a sequel in the future. But given what the game tries to do, I think it would be a better game if it allowed the player to choose whether to take revenge or not, in the end, for instance. With all the buzz surrounding it, I think it would have been hilarious if the player choosing to take revenge caused Ellie to die in the process, while moving on led to the current ending.

I can understand how it's not for everyone, and how it has a far more limited appeal than the first game. But I genuinely don't think it's in any way a bad game or a bad story, even if I did like the first one better.

10/10 on Ellie barricading doors behind her in case someone follows, even though I surgically detached everything in that area from their lives though!

Ellie had a gamer friend, she probably was told about enemy respawns!

I do think the biggest flaw of the story was the writers underestimating how much of an impact this scene would have. Which is weird, considering he was plastered all over the marketing and they took the time to craft entire sequences showcasing how much of a cool character he could be... after his death; the one in the museum is a prime example.

Generally I feel this game's story is a lot more directionless than the far, far more focused TLOU 1. I'd have liked to be a fly on the wall of the writer's room, for I suspect a bitter war was waged there.

I'm pretty sure the flashbacks are there not to showcase how cool a character he is, but to represent Ellie remembering him and those moments while griefing and dealing with the emotions she's going through. Possibly as a way to further to justify her own bad choices in continuing to pursue revenge, that are endagering her and her friends, and causing her to kill people she doesn't want to.

I agree there, with the caveat that the first one being more focused is due to it being so simplistic. Almost everything that happens between Joel meeting Ellie and taking her to the hospital is mostly inconsequential to the characters and story, other than being "general apocalypse dangerous stuff" that happens to them and pushes them to care about each other. On Part 2 on the other hand, I think Naughty Dog attempts to bite more bone that they can handle. I think they went overboard and made the scope of this story a bit too wide, and the presentation suffers for it.

So in that sense I think the first one has a more solid and satisfying story, while the second has a richer and more original story.

[Fencers]

@Fencers

The smash to credits was a huge underscore of plausibility of so many different things. We're left with ambiguity in the pit of our stomach that will never truly be resolved. Except...it did. :/

Bro, yes. My husband and I were just talking about this the other day. I think in this thread early on I remarked how I thought a sequel should have never been made prior to TLOU2 release. After playing that sequel, I feel even more strongly that a direct sequel was a poorer direction for the series then if ND had explored some other aspect.

My husband suggested the idea that it could be interesting to have had the sequel just explore the Santa Barbara folks. Seeing what was happening at the resort as a player that is informed of a Cure Gained & Lost vis-a-vis characters that do not have that information. I do think that idea would have been super interesting and potentially could have led to interesting exploration of ideas.

A direct sequel just ruins the ambiguity. It ruins the central purpose of having agency and not having it- that ultimately the first game spoke toward in its gameplay.

That, for me, is the real bugbear too. Gameplay. There is literally no reason for what you are doing in this game and it serves nothing in the end. Which would be fine if at the very least the gameplay was kinda shitty (Spec Ops the Line) or mediocre, but ND made it quite spectacular in the presentation. You still get a New Game+ mode so you can buzzsaw through enemies fully loaded to bear.

Pretty cool ambitions. I am not sure they were actually realized when it came to actually playing this game- the whole point.

[un_known]

been watching this, pretty much anything regarding dev's talking about the game (which includes Alanah, found out that i agree with everything she talks about =O)

[RobertoCarlos]

This is the funniest naughty dog game I've played since crash bandicoot when I was a kid. It keeps getting better and better the further you go. The gameplay is incredibly thrilling mid to late game. Will definitely have a few run throughs of this over the years.

So lol at how misinformed people were pre launch about the story. Can't imagine missing out on this game because youtubers needed content during covid lockdown

[Gigantique]

Of course stories are subjective. But it doesn't change the fact that there is a clear intention behind the story and how it's told. And the fact that you and many people were unable to see past that death, does not erase it. Of course, it also doesn't change that you didn't enjoy it much, that is fair, but I don't think it makes it a bad story, much less a bad game. To me, it would be like saying Hamlet sucks because he is constantly willingly ignoring opportunities to avenge his father (random example, not comparing or saying they are at the same level in any way).

While I was playing, and soon after finishing, I had the same feeling that they should have just made us play as Abby first. Or even have Abby's part as a "2nd run" option, Resident Evil 2 style. But thinking back on it, I think it would probably not have helped much. If anything it would have made it worse. The reason you play first as Ellie, and the reason that death happens in the very beginning, is that they want you to hate Abby. They want you to mirror exactly what Ellie is feeling about her. Not through empathy towards Ellie, but by genuinely and personally caring about that death. You, the player, are not Ellie. You have zero influence on what choices she makes in the story. But the way the story it's told, they first make you hate her for personal reasons, and then they try to let you see that perspective matters. Not by telling you or even showing you, but by making you experience it. They want you to go through a similar emotional progression, from blindly hating her, to understanding her and what she did, to potentially even liking her as a character.

Abby is objectively not a villain in any way, she's just as nuanced as Ellie or Joel. Of course you might still not care, but it doesn't change the fact that it is that way. And again, it does that not just by showing it, but by making you experience it.

I think the biggest "sin" this game commits, is going through all that trouble to challenge/test the player, and not reflect it in any way. I understand that the game can't really have drastically different endings especially considering there might be a sequel in the future. But given what the game tries to do, I think it would be a better game if it allowed the player to choose whether to take revenge or not, in the end, for instance. With all the buzz surrounding it, I think it would have been hilarious if the player choosing to take revenge caused Ellie to die in the process, while moving on led to the current ending.

I can understand how it's not for everyone, and how it has a far more limited appeal than the first game. But I genuinely don't think it's in any way a bad game or a bad story, even if I did like the first one better.



Ellie had a gamer friend, she probably was told about enemy respawns!



I'm pretty sure the flashbacks are there not to showcase how cool a character he is, but to represent Ellie remembering him and those moments while griefing and dealing with the emotions she's going through. Possibly as a way to further to justify her own bad choices in continuing to pursue revenge, that are endagering her and her friends, and causing her to kill people she doesn't want to.

I agree there, with the caveat that the first one being more focused is due to it being so simplistic. Almost everything that happens between Joel meeting Ellie and taking her to the hospital is mostly inconsequential to the characters and story, other than being "general apocalypse dangerous stuff" that happens to them and pushes them to care about each other. On Part 2 on the other hand, I think Naughty Dog attempts to bite more bone that they can handle. I think they went overboard and made the scope of this story a bit too wide, and the presentation suffers for it.

So in that sense I think the first one has a more solid and satisfying story, while the second has a richer and more original story.

(I honestly don't know how to quote only parts of a post)

While I agree with you on that they had a clear vision and went with it, their gamble doesn't seem to have paid off much. This story might even have been enjoyable if the characters were randoms that were set up in the beginning, but the way they handled it would instantly polarise the people playing it based on their feelings towards Joel. And saying that it's because I/we "can't get past it" is a bit disingenous, as it's designed to invoke emotions in us, not for us to get past.

I've never liked the shocking gut-wrenching deaths for the shock factor to score cheap edge-points, and this honestly felt like I would read a new trilogy of Harry Potter, and within the first paragraph some random mook smashes Harry's head in. It doesn't matter how human you then make the mook, it's not gonna make up for the 7 books of attachment and respect I had for Harry's character that you just took a steaming shit on. :P

Ended up giving Naughty Dog my munnehs for this game because pf the gf, but it has moved Naughty Dog off my "near guaranteed launch day purchase" list and onto the "scrutinise the living hell outta any game before buying" list instead.

[Kolvarg]

(I honestly don't know how to quote only parts of a post)

While I agree with you on that they had a clear vision and went with it, their gamble doesn't seem to have paid off much. This story might even have been enjoyable if the characters were randoms that were set up in the beginning, but the way they handled it would instantly polarise the people playing it based on their feelings towards Joel. And saying that it's because I/we "can't get past it" is a bit disingenous, as it's designed to invoke emotions in us, not for us to get past.

I've never liked the shocking gut-wrenching deaths for the shock factor to score cheap edge-points, and this honestly felt like I would read a new trilogy of Harry Potter, and within the first paragraph some random mook smashes Harry's head in. It doesn't matter how human you then make the mook, it's not gonna make up for the 7 books of attachment and respect I had for Harry's character that you just took a steaming shit on. :P

Ended up giving Naughty Dog my munnehs for this game because pf the gf, but it has moved Naughty Dog off my "near guaranteed launch day purchase" list and onto the "scrutinise the living hell outta any game before buying" list instead.

(I do it by copy pasting the entire [QUOTE] segment and then manually deleting the parts I don't want)

I do think it's fair to say it, because the game does seem very much designed to get you angry, sad, even disgusted at that death, but it's also designed to then try to have you overcome those feelings by giving you the full context and other perspectives. Now of course it's very much arguable whether the game does a good job in what it tries to do, but the fact that there are people that were not able to see past that death is not necessarily an indicator that it does not do a good job, just like the fact that there are people that were able to "get it" does not necessarily indicate it was well done.

So I do think that it's fair to say that some people are having a negative reception of the game because they just didn't "get it". This of course doesn't mean that there is no valid criticism to be made about the game. There's plenty, and even the fact that it failed to "click" with a significant amount of players IS valid criticism, I just don't think it makes it a bad story. And while that death is purposefully presented in a shocking way, both the death and the way it is presented serve a purpose in the story, it's not done just for shock value. And despite the death, the game still does provide the player meaningful closure to the character and resolves the first game's ambiguous ending (imo, of course).

I think part of it might have been, at least for some people, that that death made them angry not at Abby, but immediately at the game/writers. And that in part that was caused or at the very least amplified by the leaks, causing some people not to give a proper chance to the game. But that's just me talking out of my ass, and regardless of this, I can completely see that what the game tries to do isn't going to necessarily click with everyone.

Personally I had similar feelings throughout most of Abby's segment, though she did start growing on me slowly. But I was still... ambivalent about the story as a whole, even after finishing the game. It was only after discussing it and giving proper thought to the story as a whole that I started seeing why it is structured the way it is and organizing how I felt about it. And I do think overall it might have been (maybe) a better game if it was done differently, but it would be an inferior experience.