Board 8 > **SPOILER TOPIC** The Last of Us Part 2 **SPOILERS**

(+) Yeah! (+)

pezzicle posted...

Sure, but I haven't seen anyone in this topic having a conversation about different aspects of the game that they have issue with

Okay, I got you mostly up until this point, but this is just flat out wrong unless you ignored most posts.

---

ctesjbuvf posted...

Okay, I got you mostly up until this point, but this is just flat out wrong unless you ignored most posts.

(Psst this is why I am ignoring his posts. I don't have time to deal with people who purposefully misunderstand or misrepresent things I'm saying and I'd rather engage with people who can actually have discourse.)

---

pezzicle posted...

I disagree because the way people are looking at this game is based on the first game. If you have not played the first game you won't have any sort of issue with the beats of the story because they mean nothing to you.

I have never played or watched any The Last of Us content. I would probably stop playing after Abby kills Joel and you then play as her because why would I want to play as her? She seems like a totally unlikable character, the kind you would typically be fighting against. I would just be confused why I'm not playing only as Ellie looking for revenge, unless it was some kind of "play as the villain" sequence which definitely doesn't seem to be the case.

Especially since this is a game that is not marketed or presented as "Play as the bad guy".

---

Yeah even though I'm fine with tbe treatment of Joel in theory as well as playing as the bad guy to get you to empathize (considering, imo, the first game does this as well), the game still sounds excruciating and possibly miserable to play since the message just seems to be "hey murder and revenge are bad." So that I get.

Even if, somehow, Abby turns out to be a likable character, the whole thing seems shallow for a misery simulator.

---

Sorozone posted...

No I agree, but as you said "as presented" we don't know if there is additional context. Like the first game had with documents, recordings, character banter, it doesn't always have to come from cut scenes.

Killing Joel off is a big blow to the fans of the game, and of him, and yes the game gets darker from there as already stated by Neil.

Of course if nothing happens in terms of character growth(for any of the characters) in the next 20 hours of the game. Then yeah I agree this is a hard misstep, and is just a fantasy revenge torture porn game, but as far as I am aware we don't have that information and if we do it's coming from second hand information, unless there is full blown full play-through leaks out.

Ok, I gotta ask. Your introduction to this character has her torturing and murdering a guy in cold blood. Exactly what context or character development do you think the rest of the game is going to provide to make you think, oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

(Psst this is why I am ignoring his posts. I don't have time to deal with people who purposefully misunderstand or misrepresent things I'm saying and I'd rather engage with people who can actually have discourse.)

LOL man. I can't even with this.

As I have said, many times. Your. Entire. Argument. Is. Based. On. Your. Interpretation. And. Understanding. Of. The. First. Game.

Which I take issue with. It is informing your entire point. You even doubled back earlier.today to talk about this apparent document that informs your opinion about the fireflies and why Joel was right. Which I have pointed out is wrong. And you never responded to, which isn't surprising.

You have issue with how Joel is treated BECAUSE of your opinion of Joel (which is informed by your incorrect engagement with prices from the first game)

You are upset with how Abby treats Joel because of WHO JOEL IS and what he means to you.

I'm not in any way saying that your end point is wrong. That you can't be upset with what you are upset about. I am saying that the way that you get there is based on "facts" you claim but aren't actually true. It taints your entire argument to start like that. If I am making an argument about something and my initial points that support said argument are just straight up incorrect, that's an issue

---

redrocket posted...

Ok, I gotta ask. Your introduction to this character has her torturing and murdering a guy in cold blood. Exactly what context or character development do you think the rest of the game is going to provide to make you think, oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

Why does she need to be cool tho

We don't always have to play as the hero

---

redrocket posted...

oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

?

Character development doesn't depend on my end to like the character. It depends on how she is written in a way that I at least can come to an understanding of where she is coming from. I guess I shouldn't have used growth, because the assumes change.

Jesse in Breaking Bad for instance. Has character development throughout the series, but I still don't like the character all that much.

---

redrocket posted...

Ok, I gotta ask. Your introduction to this character has her torturing and murdering a guy in cold blood. Exactly what context or character development do you think the rest of the game is going to provide to make you think, oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

This is what MGS did with Revolver Ocelot! Took 3 games for that guy though.

---

pezzicle posted...

Which I take issue with. It is informing your entire point. You even doubled back earlier.today to talk about this apparent document that informs your opinion about the fireflies and why Joel was right. Which I have pointed out is wrong. And you never responded to, which isn't surprising.

You have issue with how Joel is treated BECAUSE of your opinion of Joel (which is informed by your incorrect engagement with prices from the first game)

You are upset with how Abby treats Joel because of WHO JOEL IS and what he means to you.

Another way to look at it is if the first game was leaked and what was leaked was him breaking Robert's arm, then Tess killing him. Joel killing Marlene, and Joel torturing and killing the dudes in winter.

Is this the game you want to play as? Some psychopath?

---

redrocket posted...

Ok, I gotta ask. Your introduction to this character has her torturing and murdering a guy in cold blood. Exactly what context or character development do you think the rest of the game is going to provide to make you think, oh yeah, that was totally justified, shes cool now?

This says what I'm trying to say a lot more succinctly.

Also, keep in mind she does this to a person who literally saved her life. Like, there was no way Abby was going to live if Joel intervened so it wasn't even like "Oh no I'm in a bind" It's like "I am one second away from death." Abby has a zombie on top of her. She's unarmed. She's barely keeping it from killing her to the point that it's slooooowly about to bite her. Other zombies are ready to come after her too. And then Joel shoots the zombie point blank and then helps her up and they run away together.

Honestly, if it wasn't Joel purposefully going out of his way to save Abby's life here, that helps take away a lot of these issues. But choosing to have Joel save Abby and her turn around and trick him into a situation so she can torture and kill him without questions is just so irrevocably evil.

What they could have done was something like have Abby cornered and then Joel and Tommy call her over to a building and she runs in and they slam the door behind her and then go about their escape that way. That way it's not explicitly like Joel saved her from certain death. Or hell, have Abby save Joel somehow to show she is actually a kind-hearted person, but then when Tommy says his name, she still gets weird about it. And absolutely do not have her shotgun Joel in the knee without asking questions. And don't have Abby go "GUESS WHO I AM!?" and have Joel actively try for 10 seconds of silence to think of who she is before having her go "OKAY GONNA TORTURE AND MURDER YOU NOW!"

Like do something to show that she has a shred of humanity and that she's a nuanced person before she ends up killing Joel. It's so crazy that they present Abby like this, without a single redeeming characteristic, before she kills Joel. Like, make her at least seem like she's a good person before this.

---

Sorozone posted...

Another way to look at it is if the first game was leaked and what was leaked was him breaking Robert's arm, then Tess killing him. Joel killing Marlene, and Joel torturing and killing the dudes in winter.

Is this the game you want to play as? Some psychopath?

Okay, but also the leaks also give the context and reasoning for killing Joel, and if you provide reasoning for the examples you provided then people wouldn't think Joel was some kind of psychopath.

---

pezzicle posted...

Why does she need to be cool tho

We don't always have to play as the hero

I mean, the way she is presented is way beyond the pale even for a play as the villain game.

This isnt too far off from a game where you play as Hannibal Lecter or the version of the Joker from Superman: Emperor Joker.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Like, make her at least seem like she's a good person before this.

I think this is just where I don't agree.

We get this in the first one with the death of the daughter, instantly empathize. We empathize with Joel and his story moving forward throughout the rest of the series. Hooks readers, watcher, and people playing games.

I don't need that. I already like the first game, quite enjoyed it. I'm not going to condemn the game for not making me instantly empathize for a character. When I already know going in the first game was well-made and well-written throughout.

Not something I can wrap my head around and then condemn the whole game as not being good, garbage, or whatever.

Eh, I got not much more to say.


---

You don't need to make it so you empathize with her.

You just need to make her not seem like an entirely terrible human being.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

You don't need to make it so you empathize with her.

You just need to make her not seem like an entirely terrible human being.

And this is fine with me

---

UltimaterializerX posted...

This man gets it. Joel dying is not the problem.

i still haven't heard an actual interesting and nuanced take on why the way that he dies is problematic that doesn't involve some level of "I like Joel"

I'm not even trolling, and every time I bring this up I just get told I'm misrepresenting people's opinions and my posts are trash and then blatantly ignored

---

pezzicle posted...

i still haven't heard an actual interesting and nuanced take on why the way that he dies is problematic that doesn't involve some level of "I like Joel"

I'm pretty sure both ctes and I have both given reasons as people who don't like Joel that much so either you missed them or you're ignoring them. As I said before, you don't have to like Joel to have an issue with how the game approaches it.

---

From what people are saying, there's a strange disconnect in the dialogue being presented before the death, and it makes the character of Abby come across as ridiculous as a result. It sounds like bad writing more than anything else. The jumps in logic and the jumps in conversation don't seem grounded in the realism that people need to make the scene feel like a scene and less like a necessity to get from Point A to Point B.

That's just my position from what people are saying. I have no horse in the race particularly.

---

LeonhartFour posted...

I'm pretty sure both ctes and I have both given reasons as people who don't like Joel that much so either you missed them or you're ignoring them. As I said before, you don't have to like Joel to have an issue with how the game approaches it.

and i keep hearing this but also continue to have silence on an explanation.

you just posted about how i was misrepresenting his argument without actually engaging with what i said. just dismissed it as "misrepresentation" and walked away.

then, like 2 posts later i was told by TC that my posts were trash and he wouldn't be responding. he doesn't even engage with what i am saying at all, nor try to explain how what i am saying is missing his point. he just calls them trash posts, dismisses them, and moves on.

then he doubles back and talks about this "document" that is 100% real he saw it with his own eyes. I then post said document, that actually shows that he is wrong and it doesn't say what he is claiming. And I get crickets on that front too


---

Hows this: even if you think that Joel is a straight villain, full stop, the manner in which he was killed was outright barbaric and strongly suggests that his killer is no better than he is.

---

after watching some videos and looking at a bunch of leaks , reviews and opinion pieces i think i have a fairly solid grasp on the entire story from start to finish.

and...Jesus Christ this might be the most heavy handed take on the "revenge bad" cliche i have ever seen done in a story,

it's especially disapointing considering subtlety was one of the best aspects of TLOU1. it was almost a masterclass at that.

we transitioned directly from TLOU1's ending which was a perfect encapsulation of subtle storytelling...directly into their new trans character beating us over the head with the game's themes.

what on earth happened..its almost impossible to believe this was written by the same people.

pezzicle posted...

and i keep hearing this but also continue to have silence on an explanation.

you just posted about how i was misrepresenting his argument without actually engaging with what i said. just dismissed it as "misrepresentation" and walked away.

I shouldn't have to keep repeating myself because you apparently can't remember or didn't pay attention to what other people said. You want people to "engage" you but you don't seem to retain things very well!

Of course, no matter what I say, you say I didn't try hard enough for you, so why should I bother?

---

UltimaterializerX posted...

If I save your life and you turn around and literally *immediately* bludgeon me to death, youre a unlikeable jerkoff.

sure, but that is also completely ignoring that Joel murdered her father.

Like, take this from the perspective of Abby for a second. **** hits the fan five years ago where they live, and she finds out that her father was murdered in cold blood. Sure, the narrative around that isn't maybe fully accurate, but it isn't like someone i going to say to her "hey we were gonna kill this girl and it was like his daughter and we were probably gonna kill him too and he killed us instead"

the narrative would 100% be slanted in some way to be like "Joel killed your dad and Marlene in cold blood and kidnapped the immune girl." She is obviously ridiculous upset and traumatized, and it has been brewing for 5 years. We have no context around any of those things at all in relation to her story, and yes, at the time she kills Joel, we have none of that. So it probably leaves a bad taste in a lot of peoples mouths because of that.

BUT, it makes sense. She has just found the guy who killed her father, killed Marlene, probably did irreparable damage to the cause she was a part of, a cause she saw as humanities last hope of salvation (whether that was correct or not). She, in that context, isn't think "oh this guy just saved me" she is thinking "**** this dude"

does it seem like they are going WAAAY over the top in relation to how the violence is portrayed? Sure. I can get on board with that. Should they have engaged with Abby more or in a different way so that we develop a different sort of relation with her prior to killing Joel? Maybe? I can't say, I haven't played the game, nor do I know what they do in the remaining 20 hours to flesh out the ideas and character interactions that have happened in the first few hours of the game.

But to simply dismiss the game as "really bad" and saying that "Druckman is retconning the first game" is just, not really fair at all

---

scarletspeed7 posted...

From what people are saying, there's a strange disconnect in the dialogue being presented before the death, and it makes the character of Abby come across as ridiculous as a result. It sounds like bad writing more than anything else. The jumps in logic and the jumps in conversation don't seem grounded in the realism that people need to make the scene feel like a scene and less like a necessity to get from Point A to Point B.

That's just my position from what people are saying. I have no horse in the race particularly.

Let me play out the scene.

*Abby, Joel, and Tommy all enter the compound and the other people chat with Joel and Tommy while someone pulls Abby aside.*
Someone: You're really fucking lucky, you know that?
Abby: I know.
*Everyone enters a room.*
Tommy: Hi, I'm Tommy, nice to meet you.
Mel: Nice to meet you, Tommy.
Tommy: And that over there is my brother Joel.
*Silence*
Joel: Y'all seem like you know me or something.
Abby: That's because we do.
*Abby shotguns Joel in the knee cap. Other people surround Tommy and beat him unconscious while Joel is in agony on the ground. The others grab him and pin him against the wall.*
Abby: Joel Miller.
Joel: Who are you people?
Abby: Guess who I am?
*Joel really thinks about it for 10 seconds of silence.*
Joel: ...If you're gonna kill me, then say your speech and get it over with.
Abby: Tourniquet his leg. You don't get to rush this.
*Abby knocks Joel out with a golf club.*

That's all there is before they torture and murder him. It's just... so bad. It happens so fast.

---

pezzicle absolutely 100% works for naughty dog

---

LeonhartFour posted...

I shouldn't have to keep repeating myself because you apparently can't remember or didn't pay attention to what other people said. You want people to "engage" you but you don't seem to retain things very well!

Of course, no matter what I say, you say I didn't try hard enough for you, so why should I bother?

lol, again. not engaging with the conversation.

Here we go

Leon post in response to me #1: You're also oversimplifying his rationale but whatever
Leon post in response to me #2: Again, you're oversimplifying his argument and kinda misrepresenting it to make it sound invalid
Leon post in response to me #3: You posted one direct quote and misrepresented another in the way you paraphrased it to try to link them together
Leon post in response to me #4: You were talking like the issue was that he was upset they killed Joel because he's a good person when his issue has been how they actually do the deed

Hey, we've finally gotten pretty close to actually having a discourse about it. Only took 4 posts over 3 hours.

Leon post in response to me #5: You're arguing about how he presented the original game's ending, sure. You can argue that he's not looking at it right, but it still really doesn't change the issues he has with what they do with Joel in this game since I don't agree with his interpretation of the ending and I still think it's bad.

no explanation at all of why you think its bad. no discourse. just basically repeating that i'm not arguing properly even though you aren't saying anything at all to respond to what i am actually saying

Leon post in response to me #6: You actually can have issues because it's more than just emotional attachments to the characters from the first game.

what those are? no idea


---

Joel didn't kill Abby's father in cold blood, he threatened Joel with a scalpel first. The player is given the choice of whether to kill the other doctors or let them live, because they don't attack Joel or try to kill him, whereas Abby's father did, and the world of The Last of Us has already been well established as "kill or be killed" for everyone. Joel may be the one we see killing everyone because he's the main character, but everyone else in the world is trying to kill Joel too, and same goes for off-screen characters who live in this world killing people who threaten them.

in fact I'm starting to think, with their inability to grasp simple interactions on this message board, that pezzicle was one of the writers for TLOU2.

---

ExThaNemesis posted...

pezzicle absolutely 100% works for naughty dog

LOL

i am not even arguing that the game is good or that i like it or people should like it

i am simply trying to understand WHY people believe what they believe, and they either say something like "ummm ive already said lots of things to explain myself" when they actually have said very very little.

or they have said a whole lot, much of which is just wholly inaccurate, and when pointed out they just proceed to ignore my posts because "they are trash"

its almost comical at this point

---

GavsEvans123 posted...

Joel didn't kill Abby's father in cold blood, he threatened Joel with a scalpel first. The player is given the choice of whether to kill the other doctors or let them live, because they don't attack Joel or try to kill him, whereas Abby's father did, and the world of The Last of Us has already been well established as "kill or be killed" for everyone. Joel may be the one we see killing everyone because he's the main character, but everyone else in the world is trying to kill Joel too, and same goes for off-screen characters who live in this world killing people who threaten them off-screen.

ExThaNemesis posted...

in fact I'm starting to think, with their inability to grasp simple interactions on this message board, that pezzicle was one of the writers for TLOU2.

these being back to back is freaking gold because if you actually read my post i explained entirely why saying "in cold blood" was probably HER narrative, not the actual real narrative

---

let me explain why most people are upset in a simple way

the main hook of TLOU1 was Joel and Ellie's bond. how we witnessed it developing as we played, eventually culminating in Joel screwing over humanity to save that bond.

the fact that bond immediately shatters in the very start of the sequel as Joel gets killed over the death of some random unnamed character that had no relevance in part 1 completely undermines the events of the first game. it makes it feel like it was all worthless.

bro you're the only one here that is being repeatedly confused by simple concepts that have now been explained multiple times by different people

at some point you have to realize you're the problem

---

Sharinnegan posted...

the fact that bond immediately shatters in the very start of the sequel as Joel gets killed over the death of some random unnamed character that had no relevance in part 1 completely undermines the events of the first game.

Why does Joel getting killed in the first 3 hours undermine the events of the first game?


---

pezzicle posted...

no explanation at all of why you think its bad.

pezzicle posted...

what those are? no idea

already explained it earlier in the topic but I'm glad you think I'm actually getting close to meeting your standard for discourse, you have no idea how much I needed that stamp of approval

I'm sorry I don't have all day to devote to specifically talking to you since you won't actually go back and re-read the topic, maybe it won't take three hours next time if you would do that instead of insisting I directly repeat them to you

TLOU1 actually gives you a reason to empathize with Joel even if you don't agree with what he did. I think Joel did the wrong thing, but I've at least been given time to make the connection of how much Ellie means to him. TLOU2 seems to just jump straight into Abby killing this guy. No context, no explanation, no buildup, no internal conflict on Abby's part about a guy who literally saved her life minutes before, just "hey it's Joel, oh Joel's dead." As someone else said earlier, it's just extremely heavy handed in their attempt to beat it into your head that revenge is bad.

---

ExThaNemesis posted...

bro you're the only one here that is being repeatedly confused by simple concepts that have now been explained multiple times by different people

at some point you have to realize you're the problem

please quote these explanations that i have been given

---

no i will not, because you've already proven that you can't or won't read them lol

---

LeonhartFour posted...

TLOU1 actually gives you a reason to empathize with Joel even if you don't agree with what he did. I think Joel did the wrong thing, but I've at least been given time to make the connection of how much Ellie means to him. TLOU2 seems to just jump straight into Abby killing this guy. No context, no explanation, no buildup, no internal conflict on Abby's part about a guy who literally saved her life minutes before, just "hey it's Joel, oh Joel's dead." As someone else said earlier, it's just extremely heavy handed in their attempt to beat it into your head that revenge is bad.

come one man, no need to be sarcastic with the first part of that post. i was in no way rude to you until you started to post that my posts were bad over and over again.

and thank you, you never actually wrote this out in the topic. you said that joel was wrong in the end (for the first game) but never actually wrote out why you think killing him at the beginning is an issue other then that it makes Abby unlikable. That was the extent of your conversation in this topic prior to calling me out for bad posts.


---

I can't believe you guys are still engaging with this dude.

---

You've been saying most of the topic that the arguments boiled down to Joel being likeable or Abby being unlikeable, but I don't think anyone ever said the former of the two and it followed by more since before you posted in the topic. Maybe Leon hadn't said that himself, but he pointed out others had, which is true.

---

pezzicle posted...

i was in no way rude to you until you started to post that my posts were bad over and over again.

I never said your posts were bad. I was just calling you out on conflating the TC's actual problems with "he's just bitter because he likes Joel" when he made it pretty clear there was more to it than that.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I wish I could find the screenshot of that journal entry because it was floating around months ago when people were debunking Neil Druckmann's stupid comment about Ellie 100% would have given them the cure if she was sacrificed. It would take me hours though, likely. But I absolutely remember seeing it and it explicitly stating they have failed with every single procedure and haven't gotten closer to a cure yet.

pezzicle posted...

From surgeon's Recorder:

"It states that Ellie's immunity is an anomaly that has never been seen before and that the Fireflies have experimented on other infected subjects, albeit ones without immunity to the virus."

i cant believe you havent responded to this yet

---

pezzicle posted...

Why does Joel getting killed in the first 3 hours undermine the events of the first game?

because the bond between Joel and Ellie was the entire point of TLOU. it all culminating in making us f*** over mankind to protect the bond we spent the whole game creating.

destroying that bond at the very start of the next game makes it all seem pointless, the whole TLOU1 experience. and it shows either a lack of respect for the legacy of TLOU1, or worse, a lack of understanding of what made it so loved.

ctesjbuvf posted...

You've been saying most of the topic that the arguments boiled down to Joel being likeable or Abby being unlikeable, but I don't think anyone ever said the former of the two and it followed by more since before you posted in the topic. Maybe Leon hadn't said that himself, but he pointed out others had, which is true.

from the first page:

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

If I remember right, he makes a move with the scalpel to harm Joel with it too. Also, he was black in the first game but now he's white. So that's weird too. Like he's so meaningless of a character that they're willing to just change his race because they thought nobody would remember, but he's not so meaningless because the entire game revolves around his death.

I disagree with that. He tried to do a lot of the right things, and he had a lot of humanity to him. The ending of the game is crafted in a way to make you feel like Joel is making the right decision to save Ellie and kill the Fireflies, who are billed as very nasty people overall throughout the game. It's only now, before this game is released, that they are trying to convince us that Joel was actually in the wrong for it, to the point of retconing things (such as Druckmann saying if they got to crack open Ellie's brain, they absolutely would have found the cure when the game states that these scientists suck and they've had no success).

---

also the characters speak like they're from a tumblr fanfic

the line "Bigot Sandwich" is actually in the game....most of you who read that first post probably thought it was a joke...nope, it's a literal quote.

the writing in this is just attrocious.

Sharinnegan posted...

because the bond between Joel and Ellie was the entire point of TLOU. it all culminating in making us f*** over mankind to protect the bond we spent the whole game creating.

destroying that bond at the very start of the next game makes it all seem pointless, the whole TLOU1 experience. and it shows either a lack of respect for the legacy of TLOU1, or worse, a lack of understanding of what made it so loved.

would Joel being dead undermine the first game? Would him dieing because of zombies or because he like falls off a cliff or something undermine the first game?

I agree that the bond was the entire point of the game and the reason it is so revered as a well written game is entirely because of how it ends and what Joel does

but I dont think that his death completely diminishes that. Im wondering why this death diminishes the bond he had with Ellie

---

Well, right, it was just Leon and I (at least) not finding Joel likeable. But it's really important if you think he is or not and I think that was pretty clear from the opening post.

It still doesn't change the fact that it was not the only issue presented from the start.

---

ctesjbuvf posted...

Well, right, it was just Leon and I (at least) not finding Joel likeable. But it's really important if you think he is or not and I think that was pretty clear from the opening post.

It still doesn't change the fact that it was not the only issue presented from the start.

thats the thing. my entire point has been that the TC does think that Joel is a likeable character, and has been informing his entire stance. Yes, they have fleshed out their thought process, but the crux of their argument is that Joel is likable.

that is all ive been saying, and i've simply been pointing out ways in which his engagement with the story hasn't been fully accurate, and been asking him to flesh out these ideas more, and ive just been getting crapped on over and over again and utterly dismissed

---