The Last of Us The Last Of Us 2

[jmc]

I'll just add, something that has really pissed me off is the number of people who have thrown Joel under the bus trying to justify the creative choices in this game. The idea that Joel wasn't a good guy completely misses the point of the first game. Yes, Joel did a lot of ****ty things in the first game, but that world forced most people to become something they otherwise would not have become if not for the virus. The point always was that Ellie restored something in him that was lost 20 years ago. He went from someone who cared about nothing into putting his life on the line for someone. For all the talk about Joel doomed humanity for selfish reasons, the truth is most people even if they disagree with his choice would have done the exact same thing if they were in his shoes. It's just easier to say a character was always a bad guy than admit you would have done the same thing.

 

[Snow Queen]

So I finished the game a few days ago finally and have let it sit with me a few days. I'm left conflicted despite enjoying a large amount of it.

Spoiler

Given how much the first game is built on empathy, it makes sense this game is too. I've heard the phrase "conflicted empathy" bandied around in relation to it, and I think that's an accurate summary of their goal here. They pretty heavily telegraph it. They want players to feel as empathetic towards Abby as Ellie and Joel. They want Owen and Mel's deaths to hit as hard as at least Jessie if not Joel. They want 'smash square to drown Abby' to hit as hard as 'smash square to strangle Ellie'. They want the same attachment to both protagonists, or at least something comparable. The problem for me is just they fail to build the connection necessary for any of that.

Ellie's section of this game, though I have some issues, I think is pretty great. The best thing I can say for it is that the emotions land, which is usually what makes stories most memorable to me. They do an excellent job conveying her trauma, particularly when it comes to the farmhouse sequence. So it kinda baffles me how the Abby section was written by the same people. Where Ellie's story feels like it very naturally builds her increasingly difficult struggles with PTSD and trauma, Abby's feels haphazard. There's a sense I get throughout Abby's section that the strings on the puppet show become visible. The attempts to craft empathy feel manipulative rather than natural and they really just don't land with me.

That section of the game not only welcomes being compared to the first game and first half of this one, but begs for it. And in doing so, rather than the 'two sides of the same coin' empathetic reaction they want, just highlights to me that it's not easy to create interesting characters. I wasn't expecting anyone to jump off the screen the way Ellie and Joel do, but Abby and her supporting cast pale in comparison to really everyone else with more than a half dozen speaking lines across the two games. They might not all be the most fleshed out, but they are either likable or interesting to me. This cast feels like a collection of stock characters. The relationships between them never have a fraction of the warmth that makes so many of the others so endearing to me. The only ones who work on any level for me are Lev and Yara. They don't quite measure up to the others, but because there's an interesting concept there. I think they're hampered by feeling a bit too much like props to make Abby look better, but there's something here with potential. It doesn't help that at least four members of the cast have direct comparisons (Abby=Joel/Ellie, Lev=Ellie, Yara=Tess, Owen=Dina) that they don't measure up to.

Jeffrey Wright's character sticks out as an issue. He's something of a tease for me, because right over where he is there is a far more interesting plotline involving all these rival factions in Seattle. Unfortunately it really just acts as set dressing for a lesser retread of familiar plotlines. At the very least, there should be more conflict for Abby over her decision to go against the WLF. His abrupt death left me asking "that's it?" They try to backfill substance into their relationship, but neither that nor their single scene earlier feels substantial enough for this to be a major conflict it should be. She's going against her own faction, friends, people she knows and cares about, and yet it's never given the weight I'd expect. They force me to talk to them to open doors (a bit of another issue for me as it feels like it's trying too hard to force a connection) and provide additional optional ones, and yet it feels like it's not paid off.

All of this and other issues leave me feeling like the Abby stretch of the game feels like a first draft. It feels like a lot of shorthand in place of the relationship building that makes me love the other 2/3 of this game and the first game in spite of issues I feel they have. It all adds up to something that never manages to the substance necessary. Her decisions and motivations don't have the necessary weight behind them. I understand playing the first game why Joel bonds with Ellie. It's not just interactions, it's the backstory. But here, Abby's motivations - while good enough as an antagonist's backstory - feel disconnected from the rest of her story. Her dynamic with Lev never has the same push behind it that Joel and Ellie have. Her going back for him as well kinda awkwardly tries to compare the idea of him and his sister dying with her dad because... death? It's thin. Speaking of, Joel's death should be the most impactful bit of violence within the narrative. Not just to players, but it needs to ripple as it's the antithesis of Ellie's arc. Where Ellie has to learn to give up her whole revenge quest as it will never bring her the peace she's looking for, Abby went through with it. That act of violence should wear on her psyche more than it seems to while playing as her. Those around her seem to care more than she does. It's a redemption arc built on shaky foundations as it doesn't feel like it's acknowledged with the necessary weight. Ellie returning from killing Nora or Owen and Mel is given far more visceral impact in comparison.

An additional barrier I find to getting into Abby's story is the gameplay. We jump from Ellie's gameplay, which feels like a much more polished version of the first game, fresh but familiar, to something that feels clumsy by comparison. It makes her not just an obstacle within the narrative to Ellie, but an obstacle to me as a player. I already want to get back to the story I care about after finding this one coming up short, but that's made so much worse by gameplay that feels like a step backwards.

I really like the ending. There's a real tragedy to it, watching this hunt that seemed so vast and involved this big militarized faction turn into this pathetic brawl between two people barely alive. But the ending honestly would work better for me without Abby's section of the game. The only time I ever feel anything but annoyance towards Abby is when we find her there, already broken. It makes me wish this ending happened without the preceding eight hours. My imagination could fill in the blanks once we see her caring for Lev, and I find that idea more satisfying than actually seeing it play out, as what they delivered came up lacking.

When I finished the game, someone asked me if I liked it and I didn't know what to say to them. There's a large amount of this game I love, despite some issues. I've already started New Game+ mode to play those moments again. There's also a not insignificant amount I consider badly written and I do feel the game fails at a lot of what it sets out to do. It's not as challenging as I feel it thinks it is. They picked a real uphill battle to fight, and to pull that off, you need to bring your A game (or AAA game, if you will) and this is far too fumbling to pull that off. To paraphrase a Kotaku headline I saw that I feel sums it up, I loved The Last of Us Part II, except for all the parts I deeply hated. That kinda sums it up. It's not a game I regret buying at all, but it leaves me feeling strange. Within Last of Us Part II is an imperfect but really good game I love and moves me. It's just a shame a large part of it is pretty badly put together and it undercuts itself.

 

[Man in the Suit]

I have a confession to make... Sony and Naughty Dog paid me to buy/love the game. Neil Druckmann personally mocaps my life now. They shrank my shoulders, made me look soft...

 

[OutOfBoose]

I'll just add, something that has really pissed me off is the number of people who have thrown Joel under the bus trying to justify the creative choices in this game. The idea that Joel wasn't a good guy completely misses the point of the first game. Yes, Joel did a lot of ****ty things in the first game, but that world forced most people to become something they otherwise would not have become if not for the virus. The point always was that Ellie restored something in him that was lost 20 years ago. He went from someone who cared about nothing into putting his life on the line for someone. For all the talk about Joel doomed humanity for selfish reasons, the truth is most people even if they disagree with his choice would have done the exact same thing if they were in his shoes. It's just easier to say a character was always a bad guy than admit you would have done the same thing.

But did the story really do that? Do you have any examples?

 

[Bobber]

Going back to the end of the first game for a moment:

Spoiler

The idea that Joel has a choice between Ellie and humanity is overtly flawed, even if you take out what the story tells us:

1. Killing Ellie is impractical. Ellie's immunity would not be based on Ellie, but the mutation on her brain. Whether that was do to Ellie or who bit her, we wouldn't know but killing Ellie means the sample dies with her.

2. The chances of replicating that would be highly improbable. As we live through an actual pandemic, searching for a vaccine that is put into starker light. They don't have our tech or facilities.

3. A cure isn't possible. Whatever they would create would be the equivalent of a vaccine.

4. Say they pulled all that off anyways. They'd have to produce the cure. Not a little, but a lot. How they'd do that is anyone's guess, but considering this game shows these people can't even reproduce coffee that seems like a stretch.

5. They'd have to distribute the cure. How?

6. These is before we get into the very nature of the the people shown in the Last of Us. The idea that there wouldn't a fight over control of a cure is just inaccurate.

But of course in an attempt to give Abby's side of the story some sort of "moral weight" logic this thrown out the window. Note I am not talking about Ellie or Joel's reaction. That all makes perfect sense to me, and I enjoy it in the second game. Ellie's reaction is what it should be based on the first game imo, but that doesn't make her reasoning anymore logical. It's irrational, like trying to paint Joel as some sort of villain at the end of the first game. It is the moral play that the game tries to play with Abby and her crew, to try and frame them as the "same" as the Jackson crew. It is why I fundamentally disagree with how the approach the concept of the "cure" in the second game.

Spoiler

I'm sorry, but I just fully disagree with you.
I think the discussion about whether or not the cure would've even worked, misses the point of Joel's decision. He simply doesn't care.

And we can sit here and argue about the logic of creating a cure in this apocalyptic world, but the fact is that Joel and Ellie were willing to risk their lives travelling cross country, at the mere thought of it. Ellie would've gladly given her life for it.

You make it sound like all of this was just made up for the second game, but it was always there. You just chose to ignore it, because you didn't agree with it. Which is fine. But you can't act like it wasn't always there.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Spoiler

I'm sorry, but I just fully disagree with you.
I think the discussion about whether or not the cure would've even worked, misses the point of Joel's decision. He simply doesn't care.

And we can sit here and argue about the logic of creating a cure in this apocalyptic world, but the fact is that Joel and Ellie were willing to risk their lives travelling cross country, at the mere thought of it. Ellie would've gladly given her life for it.

You make it sound like all of this was just made up for the second game, but it was always there. You just chose to ignore it, because you didn't agree with it. Which is fine. But you can't act like it wasn't always there.

Spoiler

Then there is no morality to the decision. That's the point. Joel does what he sees as morally right. Without the actual chance of the cure, what is the point of the question then? It's the trolley question, except everyone dies no matter what. The moral dilemma isn't in universe, it comes from outside of it, where we are all but told by logic, reason and the notes in the game that isn't going to work anyways. Not that that matters to Joel, but it matters to the very concept of the moral question.

I never said it was made up for the second game. I am saying the idea that the cure would have been able to be made as a certainty is a second game creation, because it is. Because all the info available in the first game shows it's not going to work. And then in the second game, it's suddenly oh we know it was going to work. Joel says, creepy doctor says, even Marlene implies it. It plays off the conversation post the first game, and attempts to give some moral backing to the other side. When the truth is, it was a fool's errand doomed to fail, by a bunch of people who lost their humanity a long time ago. So much so, they are willing to carve into a kid's head for no reason.

I understand the intentions of the finale of the first game as viewed by the second game, just like I understand the intention of Snyder's Martha scene. That doesn't mean it makes sense. Especially as it doesn't need to function that way for the narrative to play out. Joel does what he does because he loves Ellie. He isn't choosing between her and a fake "cure". He's choosing between letting her die or not. The ones who make it about a cure are those who try to morally philosophize the game. Just like Abby and her crew trying to justify torture and murder, because her father tried to kill Joel and Ellie.

One thing I find interesting in this conversation is the idea that I am missing the point, when the sequel is literally about everyone acting irrational but Joel. As if it changes the second game. I don't think it does. Abby is an awful human being either way, but you need the cure to try and give her and her people some form of moral standing, which the game is heavy on trying to do. Along with trying to make her a Joel insert. None of which works imo.

 

[Snow Queen]

Spoiler

I feel like one of the issues with the weird presentation of the ending is it just doesn't line up with the implications of the materials you pick up during the St. Mary's Hospital level. In those, the only one convinced of this working is the surgeon, who comes off a bit like he's raving by the end of the recorder. In contrast, we get Marlene, who resigns herself to it because she's tired and feels like they'll just kill her anyway. The only thing she can bring herself to do is not kill Joel like the rest of them want to do. The impression I get out of that last level is that this group that's held up as the saviours of humanity throughout the game, standing in contrast to the restrictive and often brutal military, have been so worn down by the world around them that they're willing to just kill people who helped them and children because, hey, maybe it'll work, maybe it won't but I'm tired so let's hope for the best. But it never feels like it's presented as the Ellie or humanity choice with a 100% chance of a cure that this game seems to treat it as. It works for Ellie to perceive it that way, even the Fireflies, but the game suddenly opts to not raise even the possibility of it not working. It honestly feels to me far less substantial or interesting than what I got out of the collectibles across the hospital.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Spoiler

I feel like one of the issues with the weird presentation of the ending is it just doesn't line up with the implications of the materials you pick up during the St. Mary's Hospital level. In those, the only one convinced of this working is the surgeon, who comes off a bit like he's raving by the end of the recorder. In contrast, we get Marlene, who resigns herself to it because she's tired and feels like they'll just kill her anyway. The only thing she can bring herself to do is not kill Joel like the rest of them want to do. The impression I get out of that last level is that this group that's held up as the saviours of humanity throughout the game, standing in contrast to the restrictive and often brutal military, have been so worn down by the world around them that they're willing to just kill people who helped them and children because, hey, maybe it'll work, maybe it won't but I'm tired so let's hope for the best. But it never feels like it's presented as the Ellie or humanity choice with a 100% chance of a cure that this game seems to treat it as. It works for Ellie to perceive it that way, even the Fireflies, but the game suddenly opts to not raise even the possibility of it not working. It honestly feels to me far less substantial or interesting than what I got out of the collectibles across the hospital.

Spoiler

And this is why I have said it is retrofitted. Because how the second game precieves the ending is how the "moral debate" of edgelords and philosphy 101 students took it, without actually playing attention to what the game presents us.

This doesn't change Ellie's reaction, which is why Joel doesn't tell her. That makes perfect sense. But again, the idea of a certainty with the cure comes in the second game, and is shown in a laughable manner. So much so, we even get the hilariously placed bag that Ellie finds that tells us only one doctor could even make the cure... AND JOEL KILLED HIM! It's ridiculous.

The game refuses to be honest about it, and I think it is completely in the service of what they are trying to do with Abby. Hell it even makes Joel look dumb, when he gets all this info in the first game.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

It doesn't matter what percentage of success there was regarding the cure. And it's irrelevant even for Abby's story. Unconditional love is unconditional for this very reason. 5%, 50% or 100% chance - it doesn't matter. Joel doesn't care. But moral dilemma is still there. Cure or Ellie. Saving humanity or saving the only thing you love. And for Abby it matters little as well. For her the consequence of that decision is dead father and destroyed dreams.

For Joel it's decision between life or death of Ellie. He doesn't consider other implications, they don't matter for him if the price is losing Ellie. But when they drive from the hospital and Ellie wakes up, he understands the consequences of his decision. Hence the lie. I don't think anyone is saying that Joel was weighting the options when he was rescuing her. And he's firm about his decision in the sequel. But just because he didn't consider other options, doesn't mean they weren't there.

Ultimately, there's no difference in how the finale is viewed by the two games. Motivations, decisions and consequences are the same. To me it just looks like some people refuse the idea that Abby might have a valid reason behind pursuing her vengeance or that Joel possibly doomed humanity when acted out of love. Thus we see this mental gymnastic "Joel did nothing wrong".

 

[Bobber]

Spoiler

It doesn't matter what percentage of success there was regarding the cure. And it's irrelevant even for Abby's story. Unconditional love is unconditional for this very reason. 5%, 50% or 100% chance - it doesn't matter. Joel doesn't care. But moral dilemma is still there. Cure or Ellie. Saving humanity or saving the only thing you love. And for Abby it matters little as well. For her the consequence of that decision is dead father and destroyed dreams.

For Joel it's decision between life or death of Ellie. He doesn't consider other implications, they don't matter for him if the price is losing Ellie. But when they drive from the hospital and Ellie wakes up, he understands the consequences of his decision. Hence the lie. I don't think anyone is saying that Joel was weighting the options when he was rescuing her. And he's firm about his decision in the sequel. But just because he didn't consider other options, doesn't mean they weren't there.

Ultimately, there's no difference in how the finale is viewed by the two games. Motivations, decisions and consequences are the same. To me it just looks like some people refuse the idea that Abby might have a valid reason behind pursuing her vengeance or that Joel possibly doomed humanity when acted out of love. Thus we see this mental gymnastic "Joel did nothing wrong".

Spoiler

I also think we need to get away from this idea that either party is right or wrong.
Joel brutally murdered a surgeon. Whether that was right or wrong, because of the context, isn't really the point.

In Abby's mind, her father was brutally murdered trying to save humanity. That is more than enough reason, for her, to hunt down this mad man who murdered her father, Marlene, and a dozen other fireflies, and exact her revenge.

We might agree, or we might disagree, but it's certainly enough reason for her to do what she did.

Joel, Ellie and Abby all make decisions to act brutally and violently, and they all suffer the consequences for it.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

I also think we need to get away from this idea that either party is right or wrong.
Joel brutally murdered a surgeon. Whether that was right or wrong, because of the context, isn't really the point.

In Abby's mind, her father was brutally murdered trying to save humanity. That is more than enough reason, for her, to hunt down this mad man who murdered her father, Marlene, and a dozen other fireflies, and exact her revenge.

We might agree, or we might disagree, but it's certainly enough reason for her to do what she did.

Joel, Ellie and Abby all make decisions to act brutally and violently, and they all suffer the consequences for it.

Spoiler

Even if not brutally, he's still dead by Joel's hand. I'm quite puzzled by the attempts... When people think in categories of heroes and villains. And I disagree with the idea that the sequel tries to portray Joel as a villain. The Last of Us is simply not about that. The first game makes that point. The sequel goes even further with that.

 

[jmc]

But did the story really do that? Do you have any examples?

I’m not saying what the story did, only how people are interpreting Joel’s character now. The justification is Joel was never a good guy, so he wasn’t owed some type of heroic follow up.

 

[henzINNIT]

I'll just add, something that has really pissed me off is the number of people who have thrown Joel under the bus trying to justify the creative choices in this game.

There's a staggering difference between throwing a character under the bus and understanding a character's deep flaws. The most revealing thing to me about this roll out is how many people go to bat for a fictional character's honour, defending them waay more than the character in question would.

Spoiler

Why project a hatred for Joel onto to fans of TLOU2? It's nonsense. It's as if they're all playing the game waiting for the golf sim to kick in, and hoping for him to get hurt.

I challenge y'all in the thread. Is there anyone here who loved The Last Of Us part 2, who didn't love Joel and wasn't devastated when he died?

I’m not saying what the story did, only how people are interpreting Joel’s character now. The justification is Joel was never a good guy, so he wasn’t owed some type of heroic follow up.

As the first game pointedly denied him a heroic story, when he was the protagonist, it was foolish to expect it the second time around.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I’m not saying what the story did, only how people are interpreting Joel’s character now. The justification is Joel was never a good guy, so he wasn’t owed some type of heroic follow up.

Spoiler

I don't think it's a flaw of the sequel. Turns out, some people didn't even consider moral ambiguity of his actions in the first game and now they misguidedly try to justify Joel's fate as "deserved" vs. "undeserved".

 

[Bobber]

There's a staggering difference between throwing a character under the bus and understanding a character's deep flaws. The most revealing thing to me about this roll out is how many people go to bat for a fictional character's honour, defending them waay more than the character in question would.

Spoiler

Why project a hatred for Joel onto to fans of TLOU2? It's nonsense. It's as if they're all playing the game waiting for the golf sim to kick in, and hoping for him to get hurt.

I challenge y'all in the thread. Is there anyone here who loved The Last Of Us part 2, who didn't love Joel and wasn't devastated when he died?

As the first game pointedly denied him a heroic story, when he was the protagonist, it was foolish to expect it the second time around.

Spoiler

I loved Joel, and it was absolutely devastating to see him, and especially Ellie, in a completely powerless position.

I hated Abby, and all of her crew, but ended up seeing both sides of the story. And seeing Abby on the pillar at the end, also broke my heart. Reminded me a lot of seeing Aaron Paul in the last episode of Breaking Bad.

All in all, the game hit me in all the right ways.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

I challenge y'all in the thread. Is there anyone here who loved The Last Of Us part 2, who didn't love Joel and wasn't devastated when he died?

Spoiler

I liked Part II. I didn't love Joel, mostly because I don't find him all that likable on his own, but it was still hard to watch and I felt Ellie's loss. I mean, they had great chemistry together. Something that barely anyone had on the Abby's side of things.

 

[henzINNIT]

Spoiler

I loved Joel, and it was absolutely devastating to see him, and especially Ellie, in a completely powerless position.

I hated Abby, and all of her crew, but ended up seeing both sides of the story. And seeing Abby on the pillar at the end, also broke my heart. Reminded me a lot of seeing Aaron Paul in the last episode of Breaking Bad.

All in all, the game hit me in all the right ways.

Spoiler

Ellie's wail when Abby dealt the killing blow cut me to the bone. I think it might stick with me forever. Poor lass. If there is a third game, I hope Ellie can find some peace.

I too hated Abby at first. It drives the Ellie half of the game well, chasing Tommy's lead and tracking her location. I became increasingly uneasy with the body count as Ellie delved deeper into revenge. That first Abby flashback reset everything for me. As soon as I knew who her father was, I was intrigued to see where things were going. Putting Abby against the worst foes and in some of the game's biggest set-pieces helped win me over.

Abby on the pillar was rough, but what really tugged at the old heart strings was how immediate and instinctive it was for her to go help Lev once Ellie cut her down. She really had become a Joel at that point.

 

[TheVileOne]

Regardless of the execution, the things I've seen written to Druckmann and Laura Bailey are absolutely awful. It's still a ****ing video game at the end of the day. Have some damn self-control.

Laura Bailey is not Abby. She's a fictional character FFS.

I go to be honest, there's a lot of stuff I don't like what was done with Solid Snake in the MGS sequels. To me none of the sequels ever really lived up to the original. I think the plot got beyond convoluted and overwrought over the fifth game, but man, Hideo Kojima is an eccentric mad genius, and he did the stories he wanted. Oh well. To me, the best and most perfect game/story experience is MGS1 but I'm not going to send awful hate mail to Kojima, Quinton Flynn, etc.

Quinton Flynn IMO is a brilliant voice actor. Dude was just playing a character and doing his job. He's not literally Raiden/Jack FFS.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Not the first time actors take **** for the roles they played. I hope Laura Bailey won't leave social media. It only empowers those idiots.

 

[Bobber]

Spoilered my link just in case.


It's incredible how some of the responses are "this is wrong, but it's sort of your own fault, for making a divisive game"

 

[henzINNIT]

Can the world just come together and agree to nuke twitter? It seems like everyone is a worse person on there.

 

[Marvolo]

Spoiler

I also think we need to get away from this idea that either party is right or wrong.
Joel brutally murdered a surgeon. Whether that was right or wrong, because of the context, isn't really the point.

In Abby's mind, her father was brutally murdered trying to save humanity. That is more than enough reason, for her, to hunt down this mad man who murdered her father, Marlene, and a dozen other fireflies, and exact her revenge.

We might agree, or we might disagree, but it's certainly enough reason for her to do what she did.

Joel, Ellie and Abby all make decisions to act brutally and violently, and they all suffer the consequences for it.

Spoiler

Joel didnt brutally murder her father. He shot her father who was at the time trying to dissect a 10 year old for questionable medical research. And Joel was being hunted by armed goons so he didnt really have time to debate with the Fireflies about what they were doing. Which Abby has had 5 years to discover. She had Joel and Tommy outnumbered. At the very least she could have talked to him. Or returned to Joel's camp undercover. She would have been welcome at Joel's camp. He had just sabed her life. She had every opportunity to get the truth. Instead she hastily shot his leg and bashed his head in with a golf club.

 

[Bobber]

Spoiler

Joel didnt brutally murder her father. He shot her father who was at the time trying to dissect a 10 year old for questionable medical research. And Joel was being hunted by armed goons so he didnt really have time to debate with the Fireflies about what they were doing. Which Abby has had 5 years to discover. She had Joel and Tommy outnumbered. At the very least she could have talked to him. Or returned to Joel's camp undercover. She would have been welcome at Joel's camp. He had just sabed her life. She had every opportunity to get the truth. Instead she hastily shot his leg and bashed his head in with a golf club.

Spoiler

Joel stabbed him in the throat with a scalpel, as he was trying to protect a procedure he believed might be able to save mankind. And he was being hunted by "armed goons", because he'd murdered about a dozen of the other "armed goons" at the facility. (Killing the first one before any talk about whether the cure was actually possible had even come to light. This was never a part of Joel's thought process).

Also, Ellie was 14 at the time, not 10.

Listen, I'm not saying the Fireflies were right about what they were doing. Nor am I saying Joel was right. The fact is that neither of them considered asking Ellie what she wanted, they simply did what THEY wanted, despite us knowing that actually asking her would've ended up with the procedure happening.

Last of Us was never about black and white, and never about characters making "the right" choice, in the grand scheme of things. It's about characters trying to survive and hold on to their humanity in a bleak brutal world. Joel made his choice, and with that choice he robbed a girl of her father. I don't think Abby cares about Joel's motivation, anymore than Joel cared about the surgeons motivation.

Abby had let her life be destroyed by the hatred she felt for Joel, and in the end it cost her the lives of all of her friends. The hatred for Abby cost Ellie every meaningful relationship she had.

To me that feels very human, very messy, and very nuanced.

If you feel a different way that's fine.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

Joel stabbed him in the throat with a scalpel, as he was trying to protect a procedure he believed might be able to save mankind. And he was being hunted by "armed goons", because he'd murdered about a dozen of the other "armed goons" at the facility. (Killing the first one before any talk about whether the cure was actually possible had even come to light. This was never a part of Joel's thought process).

Also, Ellie was 14 at the time, not 10.

Listen, I'm not saying the Fireflies were right about what they were doing. Nor am I saying Joel was right. The fact is that neither of them considered asking Ellie what she wanted, they simply did what THEY wanted, despite us knowing that actually asking her would've ended up with the procedure happening.

Last of Us was never about black and white, and never about characters making "the right" choice, in the grand scheme of things. It's about characters trying to survive and hold on to their humanity in a bleak brutal world. Joel made his choice, and with that choice he robbed a girl of her father. I don't think Abby cares about Joel's motivation, anymore than Joel cared about the surgeons motivation.

Abby had let her life be destroyed by the hatred she felt for Joel, and in the end it cost her the lives of all of her friends. The hatred for Abby cost Ellie every meaningful relationship she had.

To me that feels very human, very messy, and very nuanced.

If you feel a different way that's fine.

Spoiler

Correction: the games don't specify how Joel killed the surgeon. In the first game it's up to the player. In the sequel we only see before-after.

 

[Brother Jack]

Finally finished this last night. It's not perfect, and I certainly don't think it's for everyone, but it's immensely disappointing to me how many people have gotten caught up in surface-level outrage at the story and failed to at least attempt to appreciate what Naughty Dog was trying to do here, which is really very ambitious and a worthwhile feat to aim for. I've been playing games all of my life, and I've never seen a game try to do what this game does to this extent. Again, the execution isn't flawless, and I respect that it didn't work for everyone. But it's a tragic irony that a story about the destructive nature of hatred would be the subject of so much vitriol.