1. #2701
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post
    But there really is no “twist.” Even without the brief recap of Joel killing the doctor and saving Ellie, it’s painfully obvious that Abby and her friends are Fireflies trash. A twist would only be accomplished if players were introduced to Abby first, and through the course of the game leading up to the ski lodge we’re given clues to piece together to ascertain Abby’s specific relation to the doctor.



    That’s a failing of the narrative premise. Players are given that time to “cool down” and still by and large hate her or are ambivalent to her motivations. If the point was to come to an understanding of Abby’s motivations and develop a more sympathetic/empathetic view of her character, then that part of the story has not worked well. Regardless of her attachments or growth, she’s still the person that tortured someone to death with a golf club, happily engaged in an “adulterous” sexual encounter with Owen while crying crocodile tears about Mel, etc. Add to it that, as you point out, Abby’s narrative doesn’t inform Ellie’s whatsoever, despite the fact that Ellie is supposed to be the main character in the story. That makes trudging through Abby’s story retroactively worse IMO.





    I paid no attention to the leaks before the game’s release and happily plunked down the cash for my preorder. I fully expected Joel to die in this game, as his story was pretty well told and it was Ellie’s turn to drive the narrative. My feeling on the game in general is that the sound and visual elements are sublime, the gameplay is solid (though dated), and the story/narrative presentation is a disjointed mess that fails to make you care about anyone involved. I actually had a similar reaction several years ago between a comic series that I really enjoyed because of the character development there in (Avengers Academy) and the follow-up series (Avengers Arena). Whereas we got to watch these new characters mature in Academy, we got to see them and other well-liked characters subjected to glorified murder porn in Arena and portrayed as so out-of-established-character as to become unlikable. Unfortunately I’m now in Gigantique’s boat of heavy scrutiny for Naughty Dog games because of TLoU2.
    If your argument really comes down to you think you know the characters better then their creator and actors who both had a say in how the game played out you don't really have an argument sorry. There is a fine line between saying you don't like something, and saying you know better.

    Apparently all of these internet TLOU experts didn't actually know the characters at all like they claim to of. Gamers, imagine gamers telling Cormac McCarthy he didn't know his characters or his writing was bad. Because judging by TLOU2 that would of happened if he wrote games, how hilarious would that be? Who am I kidding gamers probably don't even know that name because the last time they saw a book was in school.
    Last edited by Tech614; 2020-07-01 at 12:11 PM.

  2. #2702
    The Unstoppable Force Elim Garak's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    DS9
    Posts
    20,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    If your argument really comes down to you think you know the characters better then their creator and actors who both had a say in how the game played out you don't really have an argument sorry. There is a fine line between saying you don't like something, and saying you know better.
    If the character creators can explain the characters better outside of the work of fiction - what does it tell us about the quality of said fiction?
    All right, gentleperchildren, let's review. The year is 2024 - that's two-zero-two-four, as in the 21st Century's perfect vision - and I am sorry to say the world has become a pussy-whipped, Brady Bunch version of itself, run by a bunch of still-masked clots ridden infertile senile sissies who want the Last Ukrainian to die so they can get on with the War on China, with some middle-eastern genocide on the side

  3. #2703
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    How would the players be informed on the purpose behind Abby's goal without spoiling the shocking twist? Just "say" that she's going after the man that killed her father with no other context at all? The moment any relevant context is given (fireflies, hospital, the fact he was a doctor), the "twist" is pretty much made clear. And it would be weird as hell for the characters to never mention it or talk about it between them. Hell, just the fact you're specifically going after a murderer in a TLOU sequel, right after the original's ending, pretty much gives it away.

    Personally I think many players would still be angry. Just the fact that you're playing from the start a significant part of the game that supposedly has nothing to do with any of the characters from the first, would be enough. It could actually be worse by making the player feel more responsible for that death (since they had already played and eventually "connected" to some extent with Abby).

    And would knowing and understanding Abby better before she does what she does really make it easier for the player? I kinda feel the shock factor would actually potentially instantly undo any sympathy the player could have for her by then. And by the end, Ellie would be just as informed as Abby and her motives as before. The way they went with is not perfect, but at least gives you some time to cool down a bit and recover from that shock before trying to understand Abby.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I definitely agree there. I think it's great, but not for everyone. Certainly not the game for anyone wanting to play as Joel (though I do think the game treats the character respectfully and actually in many ways is a treat with all the insight it gives into what happened with him in the last few years, and how it gives closure to his arc).
    Not angry. Still don't like her. It's 100% that she's a thoroughly unlikeable hypocrite who wants sympathy for the very same things she does with no guilt. That's not endearing or sympathizable in the real world, nor with imaginary people. And it must be a bad execution with the amount of people that do not like the ending.

    Think of this. What reason does Ellie have to spare her? She didn't see those flashbacks. It's a narrative decision and not the decision of a person that warped.

    If Abby losing her dad is justification for torture, Ellie losing hers is justification for a revenge murder. Then, the "Revenge gets you nothing" story line actually goes full circle Where Abby and Ellie get nothing instead of Abby being "forgiven" for being human trash.

  4. #2704
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    If your argument really comes down to you think you know the characters better then their creator and actors who both had a say in how the game played out you don't really have an argument sorry. There is a fine line between saying you don't like something, and saying you know better.

    Apparently all of these internet TLOU experts didn't actually know the characters at all like they claim to of. Gamers, imagine gamers telling Cormac McCarthy he didn't know his characters or his writing was bad. Because judging by TLOU2 that would of happened if he wrote games, how hilarious would that be? Who am I kidding gamers probably don't even know that name because the last time they saw a book was in school.
    That’s not what I’m saying. My point is that the presentation of TLoU2 doesn’t make me care about the characters involved. I used Avengers Arena as an example of another “sequel” that engendered that same feeling in me, though the way that point is reached is different between the two.

  5. #2705
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    That's a fair take, and I definitely see where you're coming from.

    I guess the crux of my thought process is: how much of that (players not liking what happens to Joel and being unable to get "into" the story as a consequence) is the story's fault, and not just the player's? Can't this be a case of this story/game just not being for everyone, and not that the premise behind is broken?

    I don't think going against what the players want is a bad/broken premise by itself. And as much as I think about it, I haven't been able to come up with, or see anyone giving any valid objective reason for that death being in any way bad storytelling.

    Could they have done the same story with new characters? Technically yes, but they would have never been able to achieve what they actually wanted to do, which is to challenge the player over their own feelings towards a character they love. And would it even be a "The Last of Us" game, if they did it with new characters?

    I have no trouble at all with anyone disliking the game, or the story. Like you say ultimately no matter how objective one tries to be, there's always a big degree of subjectivity to any game or story. Especially when one is only talking about whether they liked something or not, and not any sense of "objective" quality that something might have. It's entirely possible to like something "objectively" bad, as is it possible to dislike something "objectively" good. The problem I have is that the negative buzz as a whole tends to conflate their subjective opinion with the game being bad, or even horrible/terrible.

    I think to me at least it's kinda similar with what happened with Death Stranding, where a lot of people were crapping on a game that simply wasn't for them. And in the same way it's not like that game didn't have its problems, simply that apparently we live in a world where any media must be able to entertain everyone, and quality-wise is either a 0 or a 10 for many people.



    To be fair, I think the game is heavily oriented (at a fault) towards people who have played the first, or at least are fairly familiar with the story. The emotional impact that death is supposed to have just can't be realistically expected from what little you know about the characters from this game alone. So the "meta" goals the writing has can't really work much. I believe this is why the game is very specifically titled "Part 2", it's supposed to be experienced as a direct continuation of the original's story.

    The gameplay discrepancy with the story is definitely another big flaw with the game, I think, and a very valid complaint. I do think it was somewhat expected, since an issue present in any Naughty Dog game, but it's particularly bad in this game because of the theme.

    "but I was too vengeful to leave anything standing". Overall what I'm saying is that this, in my humble opinion, is part of the problem that caused you to not like the story very much. In my eyes the story is not supposed to be about Ellie seeking revenge, but about Ellie dealing with Joel's death, and various stages of grief and the general feeling of purposelessness and her survivor's guilt. The ending of the game is not supposed to be about Ellie "forgiving" Abby, but about forgiving Joel, and coming to terms with the fact that he's gone and she'll never have the opportunity to mend their relationship anymore, no matter what happens to Abby
    Ellie doesn’t go through any stages of grief. Her character is flat through almost the entire game. She’s angry, then she’s more angry, then she’s more angry... then she’s more angry... then... she’s... more angry...

    That’s not stages of grief. That’s one note being bashed over and over and over again. The game has about as much nuance as a sledgehammer and that’s not good when the defining characteristic of the fist game was the nuance.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    If your argument really comes down to you think you know the characters better then their creator and actors who both had a say in how the game played out you don't really have an argument sorry. There is a fine line between saying you don't like something, and saying you know better.

    Apparently all of these internet TLOU experts didn't actually know the characters at all like they claim to of. Gamers, imagine gamers telling Cormac McCarthy he didn't know his characters or his writing was bad. Because judging by TLOU2 that would of happened if he wrote games, how hilarious would that be? Who am I kidding gamers probably don't even know that name because the last time they saw a book was in school.
    If only there was someone whose job it was to make sure the reader or viewer appropriately understands what the story is trying to communicate. Perhaps we could call that person the... writer.

    This is a lot simpler than you are making it out to be. If one kid fails a class, it’s probably the kids fault. If the majority of the class fails, it’s probably the teacher’s fault. If most people seem to be unable to understand what the hell you were trying to say, the problem isn’t the audience.
    "stop puting you idiotic liberal words into my mouth"
    -ynnady

  6. #2706
    What i find funny is that this game story is being given the seal of being a story masterpiece, while being litered with cheap flash back trick to force an emotion instead of being useful to the plot. A trick that is literally laughed at in other medias. Which is odd because video game have an advantage here like books, they can literally be hundred of hours to flesh things out and not need to rely on surprise flash back gatcha, arent you sad, this happened years ealier, and your character knows about it, but is now remember it at an opportune time so that you are sad too! I guess video game have a long way to go if this is the level of story a "master piece" needs. Whats also funny to me is that i dont think a video game needs a master piece level story, to be a master piece game. The problem is the people defending this game seems to think so, since the gameplay here is slightly above average.
    Last edited by minteK917; 2020-07-01 at 01:28 PM.

  7. #2707
    Titan
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    14,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Bennett View Post
    Genuinely a better plot
    Aside from the games most vehement white knights. I posted the same suggestion and got called a retard for it. The story is disjointed and that one change would fix a lot of problems.

  8. #2708
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    Aside from the games most vehement white knights. I posted the same suggestion and got called a retard for it. The story is disjointed and that one change would fix a lot of problems.
    Apparently, Abby and Ellie dieing because their drive for revenge was their ultimate undoing is too dark and depressing.

    Kinda ironic, really.

  9. #2709
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post
    *snip*
    You should read what I was replying to. I was not talking about TLOU2's story, but Elim Garak's proposed better version of it, in his understanding.

    Imo the fact that some or even many players were not able to sympathize/empathize is not necessarily indicative that the premise behind the story and how it's told failed. Ultimately art is art, and a story is a story. You can't force someone to feel something about a character, just like not everyone grew attached to Joel in the first game, despite it being generally accepted as a masterpiece (nowadays, anyway).

    I'm not saying this one is, or that it does it perfectly, but the game not clicking with some people could be more indicative that the game is not for everyone than it is that the story is not decent.

    Like I mentioned in replying to Gigantique's, your experience is your experience and it's perfectly fine that you didn't like it. As is that you have become more skeptical of Naughty Dog's work. Personally, the game surprised me positively in retrospective, because although it is overall a messier game with a much less clear and direct story, it is a lot more going on underneath and when it comes to symbolism and metaphor. But that's just my take on it!

    Quote Originally Posted by PaladinSum View Post
    Not angry. Still don't like her. It's 100% that she's a thoroughly unlikeable hypocrite who wants sympathy for the very same things she does with no guilt. That's not endearing or sympathizable in the real world, nor with imaginary people. And it must be a bad execution with the amount of people that do not like the ending.

    Think of this. What reason does Ellie have to spare her? She didn't see those flashbacks. It's a narrative decision and not the decision of a person that warped.

    If Abby losing her dad is justification for torture, Ellie losing hers is justification for a revenge murder. Then, the "Revenge gets you nothing" story line actually goes full circle Where Abby and Ellie get nothing instead of Abby being "forgiven" for being human trash.
    I don't know why do you still keep replying to me when you constantly describe me either as a blind fanboy or as a treacherous "fake", pretending to have a nuanced opinion while actually thinking the game is perfect. But I'll bite one last time.

    The fact that there are presumably many people that did not like the ending says nothing about its quality. Popularity and quality are not always directly related. Plus it's disengenuous to conclude the amount of people who disliked the story is relevant, since it's impossible to know exactly what percentage of people who finished the game they actually are.

    Anyway, I don't see how Abby wants sympathy more than anyone else in the game, or how and when she asks for it. She's a flawed human being like most other characters. And other characters are hypocrite as well (as are many, if not the vast majority, of real people). It's perfectly fine for you or any other person not to like her, but that doesn't mean she's unlikeable. The reason Ellie has to spare her, is that, like you said yourself, revenge gets you nothing. Killing Abby would fix nothing for Ellie, if anything it could possible mean she would have to kill Lev as well, or risk Lev coming after her one day. I didn't see it as Abby being "forgiven", I saw it simply as Ellie finally moving on from Joel, accepting his death and that killing Abby would change nothing, only drive herself deeper down the rabbit hole. This is reinforced by the parallel between Ellie's and Abby's nightmares. Ellie has nightmares and trauma about what Abby did in the Ski Lodge. Abby has nightmares and trauma about what Joel did in the hospital. Throughout the game you see that Abby's nightmares didn't go away by torturing and killing Joel. In fact if anything they got worse, and only made her realize what a shitty and shallow person she has become because of being so tunnelvisioned in her revenge. It's only by risking her own life for an altruistic cause (helping Yara and Lev), and allowing that interaction to soften her and help her move on, that she finally gets rid of the nigtmares, and dreams of her father being peaceful and proud about her. In the same way, Ellie is tormented by the nightmares to the point where she once again leaves her family to go after Abby. And it's only by moving on, and accepting that Joel isn't coming back, by forgiving him for what he did, and by accepting that she will never have the chance to mend their relationship, that she finally gets rid of the nightmares and finds peace.

    Ellie doesn't spare Abby because Abby has become a better person (she doesn't really know, like we as players know, though she does have some clues relating to Lev, since she did learn enough about the WLF and the Scars to understand there is something there). The truth is Ellie was never struggling to get revenge, but to deal with her own emotions. Revenge was the scapegoat Ellie focused her energy on, believing for some time that it would fix things, and giving her a purpose. But through remembering Joel, and through the trauma of being faced with the consequence of her actions in pursuing revenge, she was able to deal with her own interior without having to resort to killing Abby (which would fix nothing).


    Quote Originally Posted by NineSpine View Post
    Ellie doesn’t go through any stages of grief. Her character is flat through almost the entire game. She’s angry, then she’s more angry, then she’s more angry... then she’s more angry... then... she’s... more angry...

    That’s not stages of grief. That’s one note being bashed over and over and over again. The game has about as much nuance as a sledgehammer and that’s not good when the defining characteristic of the fist game was the nuance.

    If only there was someone whose job it was to make sure the reader or viewer appropriately understands what the story is trying to communicate. Perhaps we could call that person the... writer.
    If you only look at the surface sure. If you pay attention, look at her journal, at the pieces of information that are released later on, and start piecing everything together, then it starts painting a different picture.

    Of course, they could have gone with a more direct approach I agree. I think the game could have still had some depth and things for the players to piece together, without being so disjointed if you only looked at it superficially.

    But that doesn't make it bad, necessarily. It's a completely valid stylistic choice the writers take. It's like saying poetry is objectively bad writing because the meaning is hidden behind metaphors and other stylistic resources, and not clear cut.
    Last edited by Kolvarg; 2020-07-01 at 03:47 PM.

  10. #2710
    @Kolvarg

    That's the actual point of Revenge gets you nothing. You're not supposed to figure that out on accident. The woman who chose revenge over her love and trying to rebuild the fragments of her life should not be giving up at the finish line. Especially with how much she lost. It went beyond Joel, but fair enough. Jesse is barely a character, Tommy lived and who gives a fuck Abby was READY to kill Dinah while pretending she cared that Mel died? It'd even play off better with using Dinah as a scapegoat to galvanize her decision.

    Also. If Joel isn't improving by Ellie influencing him, then, unfortunately, being good to Yara and Lev for a shorter period of time isn't enough to go "She's learning".

  11. #2711
    I think there were too many plot holes as well as the fact that what should have been the main enemy (the infected) represent a lot of the boring areas of the game. Ellie and co. cut through infected with little to no issue and nearly all areas focused around infected can be completed on auto-pilot without having to even try. How did infected topple armies and governments but groups of 3-4 people can kill literally hundreds of them in just a few days without a single loss. Although releasing 3 infected in the final Firefly base once again causes massive issues as groups armed with SMGs cannot comprehend just how to fight against these deadly opponents!

    The same with the WLF, they apparently overthrew the military regime that were holding the city, to then be picked apart by a few survivors, the body count after Tommy and Ellie arrive gets very high very fast. I also felt the WLF vs Scars storyline could have really been a point to develop on but also very strange, especially when you find a lot of the notes from Scar members saying that the truce had arrived, the Lady wanted peace and it was great, but apparently some kids then just attacked the WLF and the whole fight started over? No one though sitting down and trying to talk again would be worth a go?


    These kinda things ruined the immersion a bit for me, something that was very good in the first one, a lot more things made sense and could stand up to a bit of critical thinking. I feel like the writers definitely became a bit too enamoured with GOTs if you get my drift...

    Some bits of the plot were predictable and while that's not always a bad thing I did get the feeling they were trying to set up a lot more shocks, but if you are literally only going one way with your writing people are going to see what is coming.

    For me the game was just a bit too miserable, the driving plot depressing and the infected literally became a small nuisance that were mostly ignorable as apparently humans just wanted to spend all their time eliminating other human factions.

  12. #2712
    Quote Originally Posted by PaladinSum View Post
    @Kolvarg

    That's the actual point of Revenge gets you nothing. You're not supposed to figure that out on accident. The woman who chose revenge over her love and trying to rebuild the fragments of her life should not be giving up at the finish line. Especially with how much she lost. It went beyond Joel, but fair enough. Jesse is barely a character, Tommy lived and who gives a fuck Abby was READY to kill Dinah while pretending she cared that Mel died? It'd even play off better with using Dinah as a scapegoat to galvanize her decision.

    Also. If Joel isn't improving by Ellie influencing him, then, unfortunately, being good to Yara and Lev for a shorter period of time isn't enough to go "She's learning".
    Like I've said in my opinion Ellie's story was never about revenge in the first place. It was about dealing with her emotions. Revenge was something she grasped at as a way to try to "bandaid" those emotions, instead of dealing with them. And when she was able to deal with those emotions, revenge no longer served a purpose.

    Joel did improve by Ellie influencing him (and in part also by later living in Jackson and reconnecting with his brother, I would think). Imo if it was not entirely clear in the first game it was very clear in this one where he is prominently portrayed as a much softer and kinder Joel. One of the main points or even themes of this game is that people aren't black and white. No character is simply good or simply evil. Every character is the hero/protagonist in their own story, and people easily fall to false/imperfect narratives and justify whatever they want with only their very limited perspective. Joel does become a better person throughout the first game. The first's ending does somewhat put it into question, but I always saw it has sort of reminding that at its core he hasn't become, nor will he ever become, a perfectly "good" person. While he has become better, he is still at his core selfish.

    Abby in many ways also has parallels with Joel, in particular that it's through her interactions with a more fragile/vulnerable person with a very different personality, experience, and world view, and through putting their safety above hers, that she starts on the path of becoming a better person. Neither Joel nor Abby just flick a switch and suddenly become good. And we don't see this just by her being good to Yara and Lev. We see it when Abby realizes the wrongs her former allies were doing, and ditches them and the safety and comfort they provide because of it. We see it when she is able, because of Lev's presence, to stop and move on without hurting/killing Dina and Ellie anymore. We see it when she simply doesn't want to fight by the final act, she only wants to get Lev and get the hell out of there, and only fights when Lev is threatened. Could she still go back? For sure. I would think if something happens to Lev she would be very likely to break completely, possibly with no return. But from what we do see, she is very much on an entirely different, much healthier path for the first time since she walked into that operating room in the hospital.


    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Xanjori View Post
    but apparently some kids then just attacked the WLF and the whole fight started over? No one though sitting down and trying to talk again would be worth a go?
    You should look into how WW1 started

    I think those complaints are valid, but also kind of generic since they apply to the first game as well, or really any action adventure game where if you judge the world by the gameplay, your character is most likely at superhero levels.

    I agree the game is a bit too bleak, though to be fair it was always described a being such. But I do think after all the characters and player went through, it deserved a few more seeds of hope by the ending, particularly for Ellie's side.
    Last edited by Kolvarg; 2020-07-01 at 04:10 PM.

  13. #2713
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    Like I've said in my opinion Ellie's story was never about revenge in the first place. It was about dealing with her emotions. Revenge was something she grasped at as a way to try to "bandaid" those emotions, instead of dealing with them. And when she was able to deal with those emotions, revenge no longer served a purpose.

    Joel did improve by Ellie influencing him (and in part also by later living in Jackson and reconnecting with his brother, I would think). Imo if it was not entirely clear in the first game it was very clear in this one where he is prominently portrayed as a much softer and kinder Joel. One of the main points or even themes of this game is that people aren't black and white. No character is simply good or simply evil. Every character is the hero/protagonist in their own story, and people easily fall to false/imperfect narratives and justify whatever they want with only their very limited perspective. Joel does become a better person throughout the first game. The first's ending does somewhat put it into question, but I always saw it has sort of reminding that at its core he hasn't become, nor will he ever become, a perfectly "good" person. While he has become better, he is still at his core selfish.

    Abby in many ways also has parallels with Joel, in particular that it's through her interactions with a more fragile/vulnerable person with a very different personality, experience, and world view, and through putting their safety above hers, that she starts on the path of becoming a better person. Neither Joel nor Abby just flick a switch and suddenly become good. And we don't see this just by her being good to Yara and Lev. We see it when Abby realizes the wrongs her former allies were doing, and ditches them and the safety and comfort they provide because of it. We see it when she is able, because of Lev's presence, to stop and move on without hurting/killing Dina and Ellie anymore. We see it when she simply doesn't want to fight by the final act, she only wants to get Lev and get the hell out of there, and only fights when Lev is threatened. Could she still go back? For sure. I would think if something happens to Lev she would be very likely to break completely, possibly with no return. But from what we do see, she is very much on an entirely different, much healthier path for the first time since she walked into that operating room in the hospital.
    Then it all reads hollow to me. Ellie learns her lesson and...ends up right where she would be if she followed through, only without the opportunity to see herself if even the slightest blip of catharsis would fill her. She'd still be going back to nothing. Killing or not killing Abby won't improve Dinah's opinion of her, so there's no guarantee she's even getting that chance to fix things when she tossed her relationship away for something she didn't follow through on. This isn't me hunting for a positive ending. This is me hunting for something that feels like an actual ending and not that the game stopped.

    And there it is for me again. She isn't stopping for the sake of Lev. She's stopping because Lev told her. The implications are different, as one makes her self determined and the other woefully dependant. Again I pose, for as much as she was disgusted Ellie, boy, was she absolutely going to kill Dinah if she wasn't stopped by Lev saying something. She also, apparently, can't notice when she's working for questionable people after her and Manny have to justify killing kids. Which is why starting from a negative reputation with Abby was just a bad idea. Her character arc is full of actions that don't represent a flawed person. She was just as terrible as anyone else in the WLF. That's probably why she fit in so well.

  14. #2714
    Quote Originally Posted by PaladinSum View Post
    Then it all reads hollow to me. Ellie learns her lesson and...ends up right where she would be if she followed through, only without the opportunity to see herself if even the slightest blip of catharsis would fill her. She'd still be going back to nothing. Killing or not killing Abby won't improve Dinah's opinion of her, so there's no guarantee she's even getting that chance to fix things when she tossed her relationship away for something she didn't follow through on. This isn't me hunting for a positive ending. This is me hunting for something that feels like an actual ending and not that the game stopped.
    Well I don't personally think so, because Ellie's progression is somewhat independent of her revenge. She got there before she actually went through, she could potentially have gotten there earlier, or she could have gotten there later (like Abby did, in her case). Whether not having killed Abby will change much, we don't know. Maybe it will help by being a sign to Dina that Ellie is finally being able to cope with her trauma.

    Yes, she did choose to go after Abby over her family, but she didn't do it in search for revenge, but in search for closure. By the farm scene, she is visibly physically affected by her trauma. She says herself that she barely sleeps or eats, and you can see it in her. She looks much thinner, older and less healthy. She willingly risks sacrificing her relationship with Dina not because she wants to kill Abby, but because she wants to put an end to this chapter of her life. And through her final journey in search for Abby, and their fight, and everything she went through, she is able to achieve that without actually following through with killing Abby. I would argue by choosing not to kill Abby she was able to go back to Jackson with at least a step in the path of recovering her humanity.


    Quote Originally Posted by PaladinSum View Post
    And there it is for me again. She isn't stopping for the sake of Lev. She's stopping because Lev told her. The implications are different, as one makes her self determined and the other woefully dependant. Again I pose, for as much as she was disgusted Ellie, boy, was she absolutely going to kill Dinah if she wasn't stopped by Lev saying something. She also, apparently, can't notice when she's working for questionable people after her and Manny have to justify killing kids. Which is why starting from a negative reputation with Abby was just a bad idea. Her character arc is full of actions that don't represent a flawed person. She was just as terrible as anyone else in the WLF. That's probably why she fit in so well.
    Hmm I don't know how one would be able to really make the distinction. It's not like she is in any way obliged to "obey" Lev, so the fact that Lev calls her out does not negate that she's stopping for him, rather than because of imo. Personally I didn't even take it as just that, but simply that Lev became an anchor to Abby's humanity. Much like Joel and Ellie became so for each other throughout the first game. So Lev calling her out was more of something that just made her stop and think twice, snap out of her anger enough to remember how much taking revenge against Joel did not make anything better and only took her down a dark path.

    It's not that she is unable to notice she's working for questionable people, it's that she justifies it. It's an incredibly human thing to do, especially in precarious situations. The reason she does f-ed up shit for the WLF is that their enemy is dehumanized. They are boiled down to crazy cultists who do evil shit and who are murdering their comrades. Humans just have a natural tendency to "us vs them" mentalities, and that generally does tend to cause people to glorify the "us" and vilify the "them". You can see it in many ways even in normal modern society, from Left vs Right, to Capitalism vs Communism, to Country vs Country, to "Race" vs "Race". Hell, it plays right into the whole theme of cyclical violence that permeates the game: It's ok to kill Scars because they killed WLF because they killed Scars because they killed WLF.. etc


    Quote Originally Posted by Bennett View Post
    It can be boiled down as this

    > I paid money for this game
    > I want my money to have gotten me something of value
    > Other people don't like what I buy, thus my money has been poorly spent
    > I get mad at other people for not liking what I buy
    Or, you know, people just have different tastes, and might actually prefer the story as is rather than fan-made attempts at fixing it? In many cases what people see as "good writing" is just what they prefer in their personal taste, not really anything related with any quantifiable objective measure.
    Last edited by Kolvarg; 2020-07-01 at 10:58 PM.

  15. #2715
    I would argue that the plot has way more negative feedback than other games tend to have, and the negative feedback is very focused (with the odd trash opinion of "but lesbos!!). Which is a bit alarming since story and plot is kinda what Naughty Dog does. It's at least the ONE thing I instantly associate with them.

    On an anecdotal level, in my social gaming circles I'm borderline poked fun at for being too forgiving and always finding reasons to enjoy games. It's very hard for a game to turn me off completely as long as it's in the ballpark of game types i enjoy. Hell, I'm never gonna live down sticking by Anthem. (I will also hate Bioware until the day I die for ruining such an amazing framework of a game)

    But TLOU is like a playable cinematic movie, and when it does such a (in my not-uncommon-enough-to-be-an-outlier opinion) huge blunder there isn't much for even me to justify encouraging others to play it. The setting is great, but everything regarding the cordyceps is completely irrelevant to the plot. I like the gameplay, but it is not remotely something groundbreaking that can carry the game. All TLOU has to justify playing it is its story, so from an objective viewpoint I have to say deliberately making a story you know will be controversial was a risky move that did not pay off in the slightest.

    I'm all for trying to be innovative, but maybe not do it with the literally only thing your game has that can justify shelling out on day one for it?

  16. #2716
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantique View Post
    I would argue that the plot has way more negative feedback than other games tend to have, and the negative feedback is very focused (with the odd trash opinion of "but lesbos!!). Which is a bit alarming since story and plot is kinda what Naughty Dog does. It's at least the ONE thing I instantly associate with them.

    On an anecdotal level, in my social gaming circles I'm borderline poked fun at for being too forgiving and always finding reasons to enjoy games. It's very hard for a game to turn me off completely as long as it's in the ballpark of game types i enjoy. Hell, I'm never gonna live down sticking by Anthem. (I will also hate Bioware until the day I die for ruining such an amazing framework of a game)

    But TLOU is like a playable cinematic movie, and when it does such a (in my not-uncommon-enough-to-be-an-outlier opinion) huge blunder there isn't much for even me to justify encouraging others to play it. The setting is great, but everything regarding the cordyceps is completely irrelevant to the plot. I like the gameplay, but it is not remotely something groundbreaking that can carry the game. All TLOU has to justify playing it is its story, so from an objective viewpoint I have to say deliberately making a story you know will be controversial was a risky move that did not pay off in the slightest.

    I'm all for trying to be innovative, but maybe not do it with the literally only thing your game has that can justify shelling out on day one for it?
    It's the fastest-selling Playstation 4 exclusive ever so it clearly did pay off. The fact that some people didn't like the story is kind of irrelevant at this point.

  17. #2717
    Titan
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    14,128
    Quote Originally Posted by everydaygamer View Post
    It's the fastest-selling Playstation 4 exclusive ever so it clearly did pay off. The fact that some people didn't like the story is kind of irrelevant at this point.
    Ill believe it when I see numbers, and considering there's been a 60% sales drop off in the first week, is pretty telling. I'll be very surprised if it does half of what the first game did lifetime.

  18. #2718
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    Ill believe it when I see numbers, and considering there's been a 60% sales drop off in the first week, is pretty telling. I'll be very surprised if it does half of what the first game did lifetime.
    https://www.cnet.com/news/the-last-o...of-spider-man/

    There you go. 4 million sales, including returns accounted for, in 2 days.

    Spider-Man sold 3.3M in 3 days, God of War 3.1M in 3 days - https://www.thegamer.com/spider-man-...ening-weekend/

    The Last of Us 1 benefits from a cross-generation release and 6 years worth of sales to hit it's 20M - https://www.playstationlifestyle.net...arted-4-sales/

    We'll see how TLOU2 stacks up against it in 2026 if/when it gets a PS5 release.

  19. #2719
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    there's been a 60% sales drop off in the first week
    60% sales drop is actually stellar for any game in its 2nd week, and that is only in a single country. If it's a 60% sales drop WW that means the game is likely already nearing 6 million sold and you're spinning that to claim it's bad? Hilarious.

  20. #2720
    Quote Originally Posted by Tech614 View Post
    60% sales drop is actually stellar for any game in its 2nd week, and that is only in a single country. If it's a 60% sales drop WW that means the game is likely already nearing 6 million sold and you're spinning that to claim it's bad? Hilarious.
    It actually saw an 80% drop according to this article https://www.spieltimes.com/news/the-...ek-on-week-uk/. Of course, it does note uncharted 4 saw a 78% drop in its second week.

    But honestly, it's to be expected when you sell 4 million in the first week, no one is gonna match those kinds of numbers in week 2.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •