The Last of Us The Last Of Us 2

[henzINNIT]

As a rule, I do not approve of showing altered/misleading content in promotional material. Can't say I feel all too bothered about it in this instance, but I'd still say they shouldn't have done it. There are plenty of ways to preserve secrets without creating fake footage.

I think how many used copies end up dumped on the market in the coming weeks and how the sales drop off in the coming weeks will be more indicative of the financial performance of the game. But I know publishers tend to focus on initial sales so I doubt Sony and Naughty Dog cares. Theyve already got a chunk of cash from an unsuspecting and manipulated fanbase. Theyll be laughing all the way to the bank.

As someone who worked in used games for too long, 2nd hand copies of games are a terrible metric to judge a game's performance on. A big title, especially a single player title, will have a bunch of them. It means next to nothing.

I keep waiting for this wave of negativity to hit. After the leaks, I read the game would flop. After the excellent reviews, I read that they were shills and the real opinions would follow. Even that infamous Skillup review would have equated to a 7/10 in Ralph's own words. Outside of the metacritic score which was undeniably bombed at launch (and now gradually rising), the game has 4/5 on amazon and 7.3 on imdb.

I'm not denying the feelings of some gamers, or the criticisms people have, but I do wonder what the true scope of this backlash is.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I am legitimately surprised by how poorly written the majority of this game is. I probably have a few hours left, but this is so much first student film to this, I am honestly shocked. I thought I simply wouldn't like the direction the story was taking, but the writing would probably still be strong. But nope. It has nothing to say that hasn't been said a million times before, and much better. The game is so embarrassingly emotionally manipulative, it is laughable, because that stuff draws the opposite reaction they want because it is so obvious. Druckmann going Zack Snyder is so bizarre, that I still am having trouble believing it happened, but I am playing it. It reeks of the fake depth people like to speak of with Zack Snyder's films. As someone who has played the first game way too many times, I think I am done with this one after the platinum. Thankfully it is an easy one here.

 

[Lily Adler]

Judging from gamers' reaction, this is a "Thanks, I hate it" kind of sitch.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Judging from gamers' reaction, this is a "Thanks, I hate it" kind of sitch.

What do you mean?

 

[Lily Adler]

What do you mean?

It's a sequel that was asked for to a beloved game and they don't like it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's a sequel that was asked for to a beloved game and they don't like it.

Yeah, this isn't a sequel to the Last of Us, with the exception of very specific parts of the game, that show the issue with how this game came together imo.

 

[Snow Queen]

I am legitimately surprised by how poorly written the majority of this game is. I probably have a few hours left, but this is so much first student film to this, I am honestly shocked. I thought I simply wouldn't like the direction the story was taking, but the writing would probably still be strong. But nope. It has nothing to say that hasn't been said a million times before, and much better. The game is so embarrassingly emotionally manipulative, it is laughable, because that stuff draws the opposite reaction they want because it is so obvious. Druckmann going Zack Snyder is so bizarre, that I still am having trouble believing it happened, but I am playing it. It reeks of the fake depth people like to speak of with Zack Snyder's films. As someone who has played the first game way too many times, I think I am done with this one after the platinum. Thankfully it is an easy one here.

I really like the first 15 hours or so a lot barring some issues, but then there's an 8-ish hour segment that really is poorly written. Major spoilers:

Spoiler

Abby's not fun to play as and the story takes up a whole third of the game for something little more than an uninspired retread of the last game and a half. The Abby/Lev relationship begs to be compared to Joel/Ellie and comes up lacking. The two don't really have much chemistry together, certainly not compared to those two, and their conversations tend to boil down to about 2-3 outlines repeated over and over.

To top it off, Abby and the cast around her really suck. Even leaving aside the whole 'she was introduced being saved by that character I really like, blowing his leg off, having it bandaged so he didn't bleed out early and beating him to death with a golf club over what seemed like at least an hour' thing which is... a pretty big ****ing deal, they all fall flat. Owen's the worst offender of those around her, and the only time I've been tempted to skip a cutscene in either game is watching their date in the Aquarium. The whole group is a pale shadow of both the cast of the first game and the Jackson group of this one.

But putting aside her boring supporting cast for a moment, Abby is really bland. The manipulative attempts to make her look sympathetic don't work. I honestly laughed when we start playing as her and they pull 'look, she saved a helpless animal'. Then they just keep going with "you know that dog you killed? *sniff* That was her favourite dog." ******* off. Also the little bit at the hospital where they have her go "if it were me, I'd want you to kill me" to encourage her dad to murder a kid is awful.

They also tease you with a much more interesting plotline. Leaving aside all the issues I have with Abby and her cast of characters and the whole Joel thing, I do think the idea of playing as a character involved this whole faction conflict is an interesting story idea. But instead it's background noise to a pale imitation of the first game and first section of this one, with none of the character that makes them enjoyable for me.

To top it off, including a sequence where the goal is to beat up another character you really like if you're buying into this... **** off. It feels really teen edgelord-y. So... Zack.

The ideas they want to get across with this are not lost on me, but the way they chose to execute them was a terrible decision. It brings the game to a halt as you're forced into a lesser version of previous stories starring an unlikable and bland cast. All for a theme that could have been conveyed without it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I really like the first 15 hours or so a lot barring some issues, but then there's an 8-ish hour segment that really is poorly written. Major spoilers:

Spoiler

Abby's not fun to play as and the story takes up a whole third of the game for something little more than an uninspired retread of the last game and a half. The Abby/Lev relationship begs to be compared to Joel/Ellie and comes up lacking. The two don't really have much chemistry together, certainly not compared to those two, and their conversations tend to boil down to about 2-3 outlines repeated over and over.

To top it off, Abby and the cast around her really suck. Even leaving aside the whole 'she was introduced being saved by that character I really like, blowing his leg off, having it bandaged so he didn't bleed out early and beating him to death with a golf club over what seemed like at least an hour' thing which is... a pretty big ****ing deal, they all fall flat. Owen's the worst offender of those around her, and the only time I've been tempted to skip a cutscene in either game is watching their date in the Aquarium. The whole group is a pale shadow of both the cast of the first game and the Jackson group of this one.

But putting aside her boring supporting cast for a moment, Abby is really bland. The manipulative attempts to make her look sympathetic don't work. I honestly laughed when we start playing as her and they pull 'look, she saved a helpless animal'. Then they just keep going with "you know that dog you killed? *sniff* That was her favourite dog." ******* off. Also the little bit at the hospital where they have her go "if it were me, I'd want you to kill me" to encourage her dad to murder a kid is awful.

They also tease you with a much more interesting plotline. Leaving aside all the issues I have with Abby and her cast of characters and the whole Joel thing, I do think the idea of playing as a character involved this whole faction conflict is an interesting story idea. But instead it's background noise to a pale imitation of the first game and first section of this one, with none of the character that makes them enjoyable for me.

To top it off, including a sequence where the goal is to beat up another character you really like if you're buying into this... **** off. It feels really teen edgelord-y. So... Zack.

The ideas they want to get across with this are not lost on me, but the way they chose to execute them was a terrible decision. It brings the game to a halt as you're forced into a lesser version of previous stories starring an unlikable and bland cast. All for a theme that could have been conveyed without it.

I like the first 15 hours of the game but...

Spoiler

It pales in comparison to the first imo. Especially when you play those flashbacks with Ellie and Joel, which come from a much better, more enjoyable game.

The writing for Abby and her crew is so laughable I just... it's legitimately ridiculous. You could of had a similar game, that did not have to suffer from the narrative flip, which would have been much better imo. As good as the first? Nah. There is no character worthy of Joel in this. Even Ellie feels like a shadow once you play the first flashback, showing just how alive she is with Joel in comparison to the rest of the game. But, if you simply played as Ellie the whole time, giving her her own "Ellie" the second half of this game wouldn't feel like a ****ty retread of the first game.

They made a dumb game, and I am honestly shocked by that.

I will say, I think it is really funny, having played all the Uncharted games and TLoU, how obviously lifted so many sequences are in this game. Every part of this game is lifted from somewhere else and it is kind of off putting, and honestly shows the limitations of this style of game at this point.

As someone who thinks outside of very few exception, most video game narratives aren't really much to write home about, this game felt like a good example of why stuff like Bioshock Infinite, God of War, and The Last of Us are few and far between.

 

[Marvolo]

As a rule, I do not approve of showing altered/misleading content in promotional material. Can't say I feel all too bothered about it in this instance, but I'd still say they shouldn't have done it. There are plenty of ways to preserve secrets without creating fake footage.



As someone who worked in used games for too long, 2nd hand copies of games are a terrible metric to judge a game's performance on. A big title, especially a single player title, will have a bunch of them. It means next to nothing.

I keep waiting for this wave of negativity to hit. After the leaks, I read the game would flop. After the excellent reviews, I read that they were shills and the real opinions would follow. Even that infamous Skillup review would have equated to a 7/10 in Ralph's own words. Outside of the metacritic score which was undeniably bombed at launch (and now gradually rising), the game has 4/5 on amazon and 7.3 on imdb.

I'm not denying the feelings of some gamers, or the criticisms people have, but I do wonder what the true scope of this backlash is.

I meant compare it to trends of other Naughty Dog games and the first games's turnover rate. There were reports of some stores having to refuse used copies of LOU2, because they were receiving so many shortly after release. I really doubt that many used copies of LOU1 were being dumped on the market less than a week after release. And single player games these days tend to have DLC and New Game+. This game has New Game+ so I would expect gamers to hold onto it longer than than they would a bad game with no replay value.

 

[jmc]

I'm not sure how much replay value there is in this. At the end of the day I think this will be remembered as a sequel that didn't need to happen and one that people will simply forget about. It's emotional impact on a lot of people clearly isn't going to last to anywhere near the same level as the first one, I think there's no doubt about that. The Zack Snyder comparison isn't far off IMO. Snyder thought he knew better than what people wanted. Druckmann decisions reek of the same mindset. Every single creative person who taken on a beloved franchise in the last 10 years and decided to dismantle it has resulted in the same thing for each franchise - its downfall.

 

[Man in the Suit]

I finished Part II. It's a horror story about love becoming hate. At what point is it really surviving when you're losing your humanity? The performances are amazing. This is a fantastic looking game, the locations are gorgeous. The final shot will stick with me. A masterpiece.

 

[henzINNIT]

I meant compare it to trends of other Naughty Dog games and the first games's turnover rate. There were reports of some stores having to refuse used copies of LOU2, because they were receiving so many shortly after release. I really doubt that many used copies of LOU1 were being dumped on the market less than a week after release. And single player games these days tend to have DLC and New Game+. This game has New Game+ so I would expect gamers to hold onto it longer than than they would a bad game with no replay value.

I can't speak to the Last of Us 1 but I know Uncharted 4 stock was pretty decent pretty fast. I can also check the stock levels in cex right now (the big 2nd hand retailer in the uk) and see that as of this post - only a handful of stores across the country have TLOU2, 15 copies in total. Hardly a tidal wave of sellers.

 

[BattleCat]

The outrage from people about this game, makes me think of the Kathy Bates character in the movie misery.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I feel motivation behind creation of Part II is very similar to how Batman v Superman came to be. It grew out of the controversy regarding finales of respective first installments.

 

[henzINNIT]

Was there a controversy around the first game though? BvS definitely responded to the criticism of casual mass destruction in Man of Steel, but what was the comparable issue for the Last of Us?

I think Part 2 is absolutely built on the ending of the first game, as the story is largely the consequences of Joel's decisions. Was that ending controversial though? I thought it was just dark. People may agree or disagree with Joel's actions, however I thought it was understood that it was a moral quandary and certainly not a triumphant act.

 

[The Joker]

The outrage from people about this game, makes me think of the Kathy Bates character in the movie misery.

Very apt lol.

Spoiler

Easy to imagine some fans reacting like that about Joel.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Was there a controversy around the first game though? BvS definitely responded to the criticism of casual mass destruction in Man of Steel, but what was the comparable issue for the Last of Us?

I think Part 2 is absolutely built on the ending of the first game, as the story is largely the consequences of Joel's decisions. Was that ending controversial though? I thought it was just dark. People may agree or disagree with Joel's actions, however I thought it was understood that it was a moral quandary and certainly not a triumphant act.

There was. Joel was right vs. Joel was wrong. The same as Superman is guilty vs. Superman isn't guilty in destruction of Metropolis. Both sequels are built on the consequences of actions in respective finales. I'm not talking quality of storytelling, just content and what people discussed.

 

[henzINNIT]

There was. Joel was right vs. Joel was wrong. The same as Superman is guilty vs. Superman isn't guilty in destruction of Metropolis. Both sequels are built on the consequences of actions in respective finales. I'm not talking quality of storytelling, just content and what people discussed.

They're not all that similar then. BvS was responding to criticism leveled at MoS, a reactionary move based on the response from audiences. TLOU2 deals with the end of the last game because it was the end of the last game.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There was. Joel was right vs. Joel was wrong. The same as Superman is guilty vs. Superman isn't guilty in destruction of Metropolis. Both sequels are built on the consequences of actions in respective finales. I'm not talking quality of storytelling, just content and what people discussed.

I have a big issue with this. Not your point. I think you are on the right track. But how the game tries to mess with how the first game ended. There is some... revisionist history to say the least.

Spoiler

They retrofit the ending with the idea that killing Ellie would 100% lead to a cure, when the first game made it pretty clear that isn't true. In fact, it made it pretty evident that her death would lead to nothing.

I will say, this game made me marginally like Marlene better.

Also the "Joel was wrong" crowd can take a long walk off a pier. It makes no contextual sense. They didn't even ask Ellie, and we know they didn't ask Ellie. Not that asking a child for permission to kill them is a thing outside of a terminal situation. It's like one of those dumb think pieces about how a villain in superhero flick is right. No, they are the villain for a reason. Not even Killmonger is right.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I finished Part II. It's a horror story about love becoming hate. At what point is it really surviving when you're losing your humanity? The performances are amazing. This is a fantastic looking game, the locations are gorgeous. The final shot will stick with me. A masterpiece.

Yes, most masterpieces lack any form of subtly whatsoever.

Good score though.

 

[henzINNIT]

I have a big issue with this. Not your point. I think you are on the right track. But how the game tries to mess with how the first game ended. There is some... revisionist history to say the least.

Spoiler

They retrofit the ending with the idea that killing Ellie would 100% lead to a cure, when the first game made it pretty clear that isn't true. In fact, it made it pretty evident that her death would lead to nothing.

I will say, this game made me marginally like Marlene better.

Also the "Joel was wrong" crowd can take a long walk off a pier. It makes no contextual sense. They didn't even ask Ellie, and we know they didn't ask Ellie. Not that asking a child for permission to kill them is a thing outside of a terminal situation. It's like one of those dumb think pieces about how a villain in superhero flick is right. No, they are the villain for a reason. Not even Killmonger is right.

It's not revisionist history in the slightest. The ending of the first game is clear. You can chose either side in regards to Joel's decision, but it doesn't change what happened.

The Fireflies were not shown to be wholly good, but were also not evil by any stretch. Their goals were understandable. More importantly, they were organized enough to find a doctor and secure facilities to work on a cure. Managing that in this world is miraculous, considering the 20 years since the outbreak hasn't led to a boon in medical training. Add to that an immune subject - the only known immune subject in the world - appearing on your doorstep. There's no doubt about it. This was a once in a lifetime chance that could have saved countless lives and future generations. And Joel ruined it. It doesn't matter if there was a chance it wouldn't work. By denying that chance, Joel doomed humanity.

Ellie would consent. She would have sacrificed herself for humanity. Joel isn't saving Ellie on these grounds at all. Marlene calls him out on that, suggesting that they both knew what Ellie would want. If there was enough reasonable evidence that Joel's actions were the right ones to take, he wouldn't have lied to Ellie at the end. What he did was wrong. Joel lying about it to Ellie tells us that he knows it, and in detecting the lie, Ellie knows it too.

But that doesn't mean "Joel was wrong". What he did makes sense from his perspective. This man lost a daughter and he will not go through that again. Ellie's life means more to him than a potential cure. Humanity, frankly, sucks ass. The circumstances in those pivotal moments are the worst possible too. Joel didn't get to say goodbye or interact with Ellie at all (foggying up consent as you mentioned), and Joel nearly walked away until his guard was a *****ebag. The Fireflies weren't liked by Joel like they were by Ellie and did little to win his favour.

Part 2 plays this element out in a way that felt perfectly natural to me.

Spoiler

Ellie accepts the lie for a time, but the cracks in the story and some external hints build until she demands the truth. Ellie is naturally disgusted with the truth because she was fond of the Fireflies and Marlene in particular.
Ellie also recognizes the massive "what-if", what her sacrifice could have meant, and resents Joel because he took that away. Again - it might have failed - but thanks to Joel, they could never try. Imagine being essentially a chosen one with your unique gift, and thinking that the only chance you had to use it for good was taken from you. You mentioned that the Fireflies didn't ask Ellie before operating. Well, Joel didn't ask Ellie either, and he was doing the opposite of what she wanted.

 

[Resistance61513]

A topic of conversation I'd like to have is: If given the opportunity, how would YOU choose to end the sequel/franchise?

Hopefully this discussion isn't frowned upon because it goes into "fan fiction" and the like but, I'm curious. I tried remaining in the dark as best as I could, so I would go in completely "blind" to the experience. I haven't finished "God of War" on PS4, and while the game came out in 2018, I've surprisingly managed to stay "spoiler free" to the experience. I honestly haven't had any plot points or set pieces ruined for me so, I was a little naive thinking I could navigate the internet, when the "Part II" spoilers leaked, and not have to worry.

That being said...I paid for my ignorance when a major plot point was ruined by someone's username on the N4G forums. haha (Which ironically I skimmed past before reading a disgruntled reply by another user telling mods the person should be banned for their username. Curiosity got the better of me and I double backed with my popcorn.)

Regardless though, I chose to remain optimistic. I purchased the game and let the content/story speak for itself and have it be presented in the way it was intended to. Similar to most, I too understood how the game was "divisive". However, I think my take away/enjoyment of the game differs from others. I'm reading a lot of people being uncomfortable with the portrayal/depiction of violence in this game, as well as saying that it's too "bleak" or "depressing". This may sound odd but, typically those are the kind of stories I tend to gravitate towards/enjoy.

Honestly I'm not sure why...I think it's because I'm, for the most part, always happy/optimistic and try to see the "silver lining" in almost everything. Subjecting myself to these kind of stories and feeling these types of "emotions", I feel, is essentially my "ying-yang". When I read a few impressions that this game was "emotionally draining" and that fans couldn't believe the ending...my mind began trying to piece together/guess where Naughty Dog was going to ultimately take the story.

I'll put the rest of my post in a spoiler tag but for the TL;DR, I really want to know what would have been a "satisfying conclusion"/a way for the story to have redeemed itself from its sloppy handling.

How I wish the story would've ended:

Spoiler

As I had said above, my mind was racing with all of the possibilities/branches the story could've gone as I was playing. I tried thinking, what would be the most "depressing" way to end this game. Since the whole game was considered "bleak" and "brutal", I figured Naughty Dog would've "double downed" with the ending and deliver something that would really hit home for the player. I understand that what I have in mind kind of goes against the Part I's ending but, frankly, Naughty Dog already dug themselves a grave/tinkered with the ambiguous ending...I feel like they could've given a "concrete" scenario as to what would've transpired had Joel left Ellie on that operating table.

Personally, I thought that's what the story was building up to. Through out the whole experience of Part II, Ellie resents Joel for "saving her"/not allowing the Fireflies to perform the surgery. As Darthskywalker pointed out, the first games ending was pretty ambiguous in regards of if the operation would work or not. While that was definitely a strong and memorable way of ending the first, and kind of does a disservice to it with the direction I feel Naughty Dog should've taken "Part II", in the grand scheme of things/the story Naughty Dog was trying to tell with "Part II", I feel like it would have been very "A symmetrical" if Naughty Dog chose to answer that question with: The procedure would've been a failure.

I have no doubt a lot of fans would've grabbed their pitchfork and torches and would still have this emotional void but, in my opinion, that would've made for a very powerful conclusion for "Part II". I honestly had believed, during my play through, the whole reason Ellie went to Santa Barbara was for exposition/a plot device for her to learn that the Fireflies have regrouped and that they're strengthening their numbers. In a way, it would've been symbolic (Please don't hate me for saying that...I know a lot of you guys have voiced your dismay over Naughty Dog's choice of symbolism. haha) Ultimately though, it'd be Ellie's second chance. Through out the game she talked about needing her life to "matter". To mean something. She believed she had a purpose that wasn't fulfilled because Joel robbed her of that.

Ambiguity and the "and all that could have been" mentality is so disheartening because it paralyzes us into believing/imagining scenarios that may never come to fruition. Joel's decision to rescue Ellie was the only choice that actually had a definitive outcome. I would've preferred the only reason Ellie doesn't kill Abby is because Abby knew where the Fireflies were located. I thought Abby was going to take Ellie to the Fireflies and all of the research that was put on pause four years earlier would've been understood and realized.

I know this wouldn't be a happy ending but, as I said, I'm often a sucker for those. It's why I love movies like "Requiem For a Dream" and "The Grey". I like when a story can be so moving/cause emotional turmoil that it sits and resonates in the pit of your stomach for a while, long after it's consumed. I believe an ending like this would've definitely done that for me...the ending we got, not so much. I personally thought it was forgettable but the one I was hoping to predict, I feel like that would've left me staring blankly at my T.V. screen for a little while in disbelief.

I think what I like the most about the operation not being a success would be the fact that it mirrors the first ending's ambiguity. However, the player is once again "in the know" of what transpires...while Ellie goes under the knife in the belief that she's going to make a difference. She dies believing her life is going to mean something and that's the final thought she has: that everything will be rectified and course corrected.

Only will the player watch the events unfold and be answered that the Fireflies research is confirmed to not have been a slam dunk...Ellie dies, they try to make a cure and to no avail. I also like this ending because it really pisses me off further in regards to how Ellie decided to treat Joel in the beginning of the game/not forgiving him for years. There's the unfortunate notion that those actions and how she chose to interact with him didn't have a concrete basis. In reality, Joel made the right call by allowing her to live a few more years. It would sadden me further knowing that Ellie is upset believing she would've made a difference when the reality of the situation is...she wouldn't have. As Joel had lied but turned out to be correct: her immunity meant nothing.

 

[Man in the Suit]

Yes, most masterpieces lack any form of subtly whatsoever.

Good score though.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's not revisionist history in the slightest. The ending of the first game is clear. You can chose either side in regards to Joel's decision, but it doesn't change what happened.

The Fireflies were not shown to be wholly good, but were also not evil by any stretch. Their goals were understandable. More importantly, they were organized enough to find a doctor and secure facilities to work on a cure. Managing that in this world is miraculous, considering the 20 years since the outbreak hasn't led to a boon in medical training. Add to that an immune subject - the only known immune subject in the world - appearing on your doorstep. There's no doubt about it. This was a once in a lifetime chance that could have saved countless lives and future generations. And Joel ruined it. It doesn't matter if there was a chance it wouldn't work. By denying that chance, Joel doomed humanity.

Ellie would consent. She would have sacrificed herself for humanity. Joel isn't saving Ellie on these grounds at all. Marlene calls him out on that, suggesting that they both knew what Ellie would want. If there was enough reasonable evidence that Joel's actions were the right ones to take, he wouldn't have lied to Ellie at the end. What he did was wrong. Joel lying about it to Ellie tells us that he knows it, and in detecting the lie, Ellie knows it too.

But that doesn't mean "Joel was wrong". What he did makes sense from his perspective. This man lost a daughter and he will not go through that again. Ellie's life means more to him than a potential cure. Humanity, frankly, sucks ass. The circumstances in those pivotal moments are the worst possible too. Joel didn't get to say goodbye or interact with Ellie at all (foggying up consent as you mentioned), and Joel nearly walked away until his guard was a *****ebag. The Fireflies weren't liked by Joel like they were by Ellie and did little to win his favour.

Part 2 plays this element out in a way that felt perfectly natural to me.

Spoiler

Ellie accepts the lie for a time, but the cracks in the story and some external hints build until she demands the truth. Ellie is naturally disgusted with the truth because she was fond of the Fireflies and Marlene in particular.
Ellie also recognizes the massive "what-if", what her sacrifice could have meant, and resents Joel because he took that away. Again - it might have failed - but thanks to Joel, they could never try. Imagine being essentially a chosen one with your unique gift, and thinking that the only chance you had to use it for good was taken from you. You mentioned that the Fireflies didn't ask Ellie before operating. Well, Joel didn't ask Ellie either, and he was doing the opposite of what she wanted.

One, Ellie is a child she can't consent. Second, did you read what I wrote at all?

Spoiler

Ellie actually being able to produce a cure is a second game thing. Ellie's reaction isn't what I am talking about, it is that. They try to make it a binary decision, when it never was. Joel was giving up his daughter for a fool's errand. It's an attempt to justify Abby and her murderous father.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

*Harley Quinn Bane Voice*

Appropriate, considering this game does not care about it's own characters, narrative or players.