The Last of Us The Last Of Us 2

[DarthSkywalker]

There was nothing controversial about it. He was protecting a 14 year old from killers. If you could play through the Last of Us and not agreed with Joel's decision, I question whether you have a soul.

Whether Ellie would have agreed or not is irrelevant. She was a emotionally charged teen who had experienced quite a lot of tragedy. Do you think she would have agreed to such a thing if it was Joel who had to die? Of course not.

 

[Havok83]

well it was controversial. The fact that there is even a split debate on it makes it so by definition.

If I had to weigh in, Joel was right. What the Fireflies planned was illogical. Say they had a cure...how would they been mass produce and mass administer something like that? You cant and without that, the problem remains. That world was f--ked. The spores were already out in the atmosphere and clickers were everywhere. There was no getting rid of that especially since there was no order or governmental structure in that universe as far as we know. They had no means to contain and eradicate the sources of contamination and all infected individuals. They need at least that if they wanted to reduce the prevalence of disease spread

There was also no guarantee that killing Ellie would lead to a cure. Thats typically not how these things work. If anything all her brain would do is give them cells to continue research and help them understand the immune response to infection. Was it worth killing a girl for something that likely would not have happened? The odds of some hopefully resolution to the clicker problem by killing Ellie was stacked against them

 

[X Knight]

so, just picked Last of Us for free as part of a B2G1 free sale.

I'm guessing it's good, right?

 

[Bobber]

There was nothing controversial about it. He was protecting a 14 year old from killers. If you could play through the Last of Us and not agreed with Joel's decision, I question whether you have a soul.

Whether Ellie would have agreed or not is irrelevant. She was a emotionally charged teen who had experienced quite a lot of tragedy. Do you think she would have agreed to such a thing if it was Joel who had to die? Of course not.

Do you think Joel would've cared if he didn't have a personal relationship with Ellie? If Joel was running around with Tess, and he heard that the Fireflies killed someone in an attempt to find a cure, I really doubt he would've gone up in arms.

It's a story about humanity, in every sense of the word. Joel was a killer, and a criminal when he met Ellie. He's killed people in cold blood. Been on both sides of ambushes. His love for Ellie fueled his decision, it had nothing to do with logic, or whether or not the procedure would actually work.

That certainly is beautiful, and I don't disagree with Joel's decision, but to act like it was the only right thing to do is incredibly naive.

 

[jmc]

I think the reason why there is debate is because the story doesn't really end conclusively. If this was a traditional story the game would have either ended with a cure being found without killing Ellie, or Ellie would have sacrificed herself for the greater good. The Last of Us ends open ended with questionable choices being made. The thing is though that's not unlike real life. Real life generally isn't as black and white as stories often depict, there's no real bad guys or good guys, no real happy endings, things just continue on regardless of whether the choices we make are good or bad. Joel's choice was a selfish one and may have doomed humanity, but I'd argue most if not all of us in the exact same position would make the same decision. Whether that was the right choice is subjective.

I will say though what concerns me about the second game is that ending to the first. I can't but think that ending has to be addressed, whether or not Ellie knows Joel was lying. Part of me really doesn't want that answered.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

so, just picked Last of Us for free as part of a B2G1 free sale.

I'm guessing it's good, right?

Its okay.

 

[ehh]

There was nothing controversial about it. He was protecting a 14 year old from killers. If you could play through the Last of Us and not agreed with Joel's decision, I question whether you have a soul.

Okay, except it was controversial. Not everyone agrees with what he did, and his decision was not black and white. Ultimately I agree with his decision, but plenty of people do not. Doesn't make them soulless.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

well it was controversial. The fact that there is even a split debate on it makes it so by definition.

If I had to weigh in, Joel was right. What the Fireflies planned was illogical. Say they had a cure...how would they been mass produce and mass administer something like that? You cant and without that, the problem remains. That world was f--ked. The spores were already out in the atmosphere and clickers were everywhere. There was no getting rid of that especially since there was no order or governmental structure in that universe as far as we know. They had no means to contain and eradicate the sources of contamination and all infected individuals. They need at least that if they wanted to reduce the prevalence of disease spread

There was also no guarantee that killing Ellie would lead to a cure. Thats typically not how these things work. If anything all her brain would do is give them cells to continue research and help them understand the immune response to infection. Was it worth killing a girl for something that likely would not have happened? The odds of some hopefully resolution to the clicker problem by killing Ellie was stacked against them

Everything is conversational on the internet. Like having women and non-white people in Star Wars. That doesn't mean it actually is a controversy.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Do you think Joel would've cared if he didn't have a personal relationship with Ellie? If Joel was running around with Tess, and he heard that the Fireflies killed someone in an attempt to find a cure, I really doubt he would've gone up in arms.

It's a story about humanity, in every sense of the word. Joel was a killer, and a criminal when he met Ellie. He's killed people in cold blood. Been on both sides of ambushes. His love for Ellie fueled his decision, it had nothing to do with logic, or whether or not the procedure would actually work.

That certainly is beautiful, and I don't disagree with Joel's decision, but to act like it was the only right thing to do is incredibly naive.

The way I have always read the game is that it is about finding humanity when humanity has been lost. Joel is a microcosm of this idea. That he grows to love and care for the girl isn't "beside the point". It is the whole point. Joel cares. You know who doesn't care? The Fireflies, those ruling the cities. These are the monsters killing in the name of the "greater good", when in reality it is all selfish.

So yes, there is only one logical conclusion to the tale. It is why there is no "option" to do anything else like other games. Joel wouldn't let another daughter die and nor should any parent. You don't give up your love ones, because once you do that, you have given up humanity. Like the Fireflies who wanted to cut open a teenage girl's head. Joel isn't being selfish, he is doing it for the love of someone.

 

[X Knight]

Its okay.

well that's reassuring.

 

[ehh]

Sorry, but the ending is controversial. His choice to save Ellie was not black and white, and it fits in a gray area. Did he do the right thing? You could easily argue yes. Did he do the wrong thing? Well I could totally see why someone would feel that way. If what he did was without a doubt the right choice, then why did he lie to her at the end of the game? The man feels guilty for what he did, and the consequences of his actions will likely be felt in the second one.

I don't know why it's hard to accept the controversy, whether you agree or disagree with his actions.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Sorry, but the ending is controversial. His choice to save Ellie was not black and white, and it fits in a gray area. Did he do the right thing? You could easily argue yes. Did he do the wrong thing? Well I could totally see why someone would feel that way. If what he did was without a doubt the right choice, then why did he lie to her at the end of the game? The man feels guilty for what he did, and the consequences of his actions will likely be felt in the second one.

I don't know why it's hard to accept the controversy, whether you agree or disagree with his actions.

It is controversial in the way, "would you kill baby Hilter" is controversial. People like to say things on the net, but you aren't going to kill your child to theoretically come up with some sort of cure, that is not even a guarantee. In fact, it is less likely then likely to work.

And you realize they never ask her right? they decide they are going to kill her without asking her. How is that in anyway morally okay? How does that make it controversial when Joel saves her?

No good parent would ever sacrifice their child, and Ellie is Joel's daughter in every way but blood. That we spend 10-15 hours with Joel and Ellie shows you exactly why he'd never do it. So why would it be controversial that he'd save Ellie?

On another point, they go out of their way to set it up. The opening scene, the vicious and deadly nature of the Fireflies, losing people to the infection, Joel and Ellie saving one another repeatedly. They continually sacrifice themselves for each other.

As to why Joel doesn't tell her, it is simple. He doesn't want her to live with that guilt. The idea that she could have saved people through her death. I never said Ellie wouldn't do it, but she'is a 14 year old girl who has seen people she loves and care about destroyed by the infection. At times, you protect kids from themselves and Ellie was in no position to make that decision. And there is no way Ellie would have let Joel do the same. She loves him like he loves her. There is a difference in theoretically sacrificing yourself and sacrificing another you love.

 

[Havok83]

Everything is conversational on the internet. Like having women and non-white people in Star Wars. That doesn't mean it actually is a controversy.

Controversial is literally the adjective used to describe the noun variation which is a controversy. By definition something cant be controversial if its not a controversy. The words are used interchangeably depending on the part of speech. Me describing that decision as controversial is the same thing as me saying it was a controversy

 

[ehh]

You're listing out reasons as to why Joel made the right choice at the end of the game. Which is fine. But as much as you agree with it, it is still considered controversial.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Controversial is literally the adjective used to describe the noun variation which is a controversy. By definition something cant be controversial if its not a controversy. The words are used interchangeably depending on the part of speech. Me describing that decision as controversial is the same thing as me saying it was a controversy

And I am saying the decision is not controversial. It was the only responsible decision considering the game. Joel walking away would have been controversial considering the game itself.

You're listing out reasons as to why Joel made the right choice at the end of the game. Which is fine. But as much as you agree with it, it is still considered controversial.

You know what else is considered controversial on the internet? Obama being black. That doesn't mean it is reasonable or actually controversial in anyway other then weird internet chatter.

You explain to me how the game could have ended with Joel not doing what he did. Because again we are talking about Joel doing this. For there to be any actual controversy, you have to remove all context. What is the point of that?

 

[ehh]

You're comparing the ending of Last of Us to a bunch of racists complaining about the skin color of the country's leader.

 

[jmc]

I wouldn't use the term controversial, but the ending of the game brings up a lot of moral grey areas that are all equally debatable. The thing about the ending is there's no real right or wrong answer, just subjectivity. Joel made the choice that suited himself and chose to lie about it. Some may see that as a controversial decision, and to be honest they probably have a case, but it's not the term I would personally use.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You're comparing the ending of Last of Us to a bunch of racists complaining about the skin color of the country's leader.

I am saying people arguing over the end of a video game on the internet doesn't change the inherent flaw in the logic that makes something not controversial apparently controversial.

Again explain to me how Joel ever walks away from Ellie considering the game. How he lets them just murder her. Please, explain it to me. If the ending is an inevitability, how is it controversial?

If Joel had walked away, let her be murdered, then yes, it would controversial. It would be against the logic of the game and characters. It would be like Superman, the man who doesn't kill, snapping someone's neck. Or Batman shooting up people with machine guns. That isn't what happens though.

 

[Brother Jack]

I wouldn't use the term controversial, but the ending of the game brings up a lot of moral grey areas that are all equally debatable. The thing about the ending is there's no real right or wrong answer, just subjectivity. Joel made the choice that suited himself and chose to lie about it. Some may see that as a controversial decision, and to be honest they probably have a case, but it's not the term I would personally use.

The ambiguity of the ending is the point. Whether it is or is not controversial doesn't really matter. It challenges you to gauge your own opinion on its morality but, for me, it's kind of irrelevant whether or not I agree with what Joel did, it's only important that I understand why he did it. They were his choices as a character in the story, not my choices as the player. That's why you're not given the choice to not gun down the Fireflies, including unarmed doctors, to save Ellie. It's Joel's narrative as well as Ellie's. Joel's choice to kill the Fireflies, save Ellie, and then lie to her; Ellie's choice to seemingly go along with his lie, whether she believes it or not.

The preservation of that ambiguity has always been my biggest concern with a sequel. It's a very tricky thing to do a continuation of that story with those characters without diminishing what that ending was. But I'm more than willing to give Druckman and ND the benefit of the doubt that they found a way. Moving the timeline forward five years is a great move. To give Part II some distance from the first game while still exploring its repercussions.

 

[jmc]

The ending being diminished is a genuine concern. The only thing I can think of is that Ellie simply accepted what Joel was saying to her, whether she believed it or not, and it was never spoken of again. But then again the Fireflies logo does appear in the new trailer which indicates they may yet have a presence in this sequel, and if that's the case you can't help but drag the incident up again.

 

[ehh]

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Maybe I am weird but I always thought the ending was designed to set up a sequel. I mean the world is still infected, Ellie still has the potential to cure the infected inside of her, and Joel lied right to Ellie's face about what happened (and she was skeptical and confused). I think if the developers intended their story to be standalone they would've ended it differently (like Ellie dying, or Joel dying, or Ellie running away from Joel after he killed those people to save her, something that ended their relationship as opposed to the open ended ending that begged for a followup).

 

[ehh]

I always expected a sequel after playing the first game. I do think it was designed so that if a sequel was never made, it would work as a standalone story, but there was room for more stories to be told.

Thankfully, we are getting another game.

 

[Spider-Who?]

And I am saying the decision is not controversial. It was the only responsible decision considering the game. Joel walking away would have been controversial considering the game itself.

Someone here clearly doesn't know what controversial means: "giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement."

In this case, the "public" is the video game community, and the "disagreement" concerns whether Joel did the right thing. Players (clearly here and elsewhere) are in disagreement about what Joel did and if lying to Ellie was right.

This situation is the very definition of controversial. It doesn't matter if you think there is only one right answer; many people clearly disagree; ergo, it's controversial.

 

[ehh]

Someone here clearly doesn't know what controversial means: "giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement."

In this case, the "public" is the video game community, and the "disagreement" concerns whether Joel did the right thing. Players (clearly here and elsewhere) are in disagreement about what Joel did and if lying to Ellie was right.

This situation is the very definition of controversial. It doesn't matter if you think there is only one right answer; many people clearly disagree; ergo, it's controversial.

Thank you.