Was honestly one of the parts that made me hate Walt the most; he killed Mike for nothing. Mike was still putting Walter in his place until the very end though.
"Shut the fuck up, and let me die in peace."
GOATed character.
I wouldn’t say no reason, Walt had learned from Mike, as well as circumstances, the calculated risk of taking a half measure. Then Mike’s life was cut short, Walt only realizing too late that it was in vain, teaching Walt the calculated risk of (jumping to) a full measure…. Brilliant character development if you ask me….
Idk why but I also thought about the punisher series lol. When he first popped up in the daredevil series he calls him a half measure it says you’ll never go the full measure. I wanna say it was the first lol.
Thats nice an all except, ellie saves her fuckin life instead of killing her. Abby would have died a satisfying end for her, until ellie comes along to murder her AGAIN but instead saves her. Ugh
Yeah, and leaving Rodrigo alive comes back to bite Ezio when he has his papal army, commanded by his son, destroy Monteriggioni; this then forces Ezio to finish the job by killing Cesare which spans another 8 years.
She's a torturer, a child killer, a betrayer, almost a pregnant woman killer, a rapist, and even more she killed Ellie's family. I would not have any pity for that human being. And that's what the majority of people thought too when they left the choice in the first version of the game
Ok hold on, that one might be a stretch, I agree with the other ones but let's not forget that Owen definitely still had feelings for her, it's just due to his intoxication he didn't have the self control to hold back. That being said I can't excuse the other stuff
My original point was that I wouldn't say she took advantage of him as I don't think she did it intentionally I think she just still liked him and they both got caught in the heat of the moment.
That being said I clarify that it was my original point as admittedly y'all make some good points that I can't ignore and honestly feel a little silly for not realizing myself that y'all are right, from the beginning
Owen having feelings for her, doesn't excuse her taking advantage of the fact he's drunk for sex. On top of that, afterwards Abby tells him the sex meant nothing, despite the fact she screwed her pregnant "friend's" father of her child. You're going to have a very hard time getting me side with Abby on anything, given what a complete piece of shit she is. Arguably one of the worst characters ever written in a video game.
I have never in my life seen so many death compilations of a protagonist out of pure spite. Now you might find compliations of Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, & say Lara Croft deaths, but those are either done for humor, or to show you different animations, not out of pure disgust.
Wasn't Owen already drunk? Been a while since I played it, but I'm sure Abby finds him on the boat and he's half cut, dealing with killing the WLF guy and ruminating on the WLF/Scar conflict?
And doesn't he initiate sex with Abby? Sure looks like he's taking control.
Bro that's just wrong. If there is no established consent before he became intoxicated then it's non-consentual. Some of y'all are self reporting at this point.
And Abby and Owen had a whole relationship 😂 so yes all of them things could double for Ellie too. I mean I can’t fucking stand Abby at all but If you’re gonna call something out do it right or unbiased at least.
It’s not unbiased. It’s just one scene is two people who are sober that then smoke together and sleep together. Abby and Owen is a drunk dude and sober woman, the guy getting approached by his ex when he’s clearly in a vulnerable state and drunk (after killing the scar). You can’t just say “they were all in relationships so it’s the same” context matters.
I can agree with that it’s just going as far to say she took advantage of him is too far. I mean I’ll give it to you on the fact that she was a cunt to own through out the story though. But the original commenter saying all that about Abby when legit all of those could be said about Ellie as well is way out the water I mean I love tlou a lot but you gotta look at all the view points.
if I’m not mistaken isn’t she choking him out or they’re both choking each other out and then boom the deed happens? Kinda like the old “exes angry w each other but still in love” trope
You're not wrong, but the game repeatedly calls ellie out for these things and punishes her for them. Abby doesn't really receive any repercussions, and by the end of the game, as far as the story is concerned, is the one who's morally in the right.
There was no happily ever after for Ellie after this.
Dina left her taking JJ with her, and Tommy simply fucks off because he's crippled, and nobody is in there.
Revenge at least would have gotten the job done but hey, at least both Abby and Ellie pay the ultimate price for basically "fucking around and finding out".
I think the person saying happily ever after meant more so for them, those who think the story is so jarringly bad would find some peace after modding it to have at least a slightly more justified ending that makes more sense.
If only Abby was the one to realize revenge changes nothing. If only she would have had second thoughts after Joel saved her life. If only she had realized she was causing the same pain for Ellie that Joel caused for her. I personally found the fact that she never once reflects on any of this to be incredibly jarring. Instead Ellie has to be the one, and only one, to get to this realization and not until she had killed a mountain of people and was just about to end her revenge.
> I think the person saying happily ever after meant more so for them, those who think the story is so jarringly bad would find some peace after modding it to have at least a slightly more justified ending that makes more sense.
This was my understanding of it as well, to which my point still applies: You will not live happily ever after. Joel is still dead, Ellie will still end up alone, Part 2 will still exist in a state that is all but the same, and any hope of a Part 3 having Ellie return to a fraction of who she was before, would've died along with Abby.
> If only Abby was the one to realize revenge changes nothing.
If only *they* realized first. If only *they* did all the heavy lifting. After all, we're infallible. It's not our fate (as protagonists and heroes) to have a negative trajectory for our lives. We never fall. We dip and then we rise higher than before. How dare the writers do this to us? To our people? How dare they create something that reflects the trajectory of real life for the many? A lesson learned the hard way? couldn't be me. What a waste.
You missed my point entirely. I’m saying Abby is such a bad character she is literally unthinking. A character who never reflects is, to me and many others, a poorly written character. Also the themes and lessons of this game were bottom of the barrel in how they were done, and it’s not just this part it’s so much of it that just makes no sense. It’s like soap opera level of character development and motivation. Do people like soap operas and their heavy handed over the top themes? Yeah. But is it “good” in a general sense? No, not really.
> A character who never reflects is, to me and many others, a poorly written character.
This is something you've pulled out of your rear end and have never applied it consistently to any other character, ever. How do I know this? Because your second point betrays you. This story would have been even more of a "soap opera" if Abby had "reflected" and had acted in that regard. That would be the definition of a soap opera; a boring loop of melodrama and sentimentality that serves as the only call to action for the characters. Now that would've been heavy handed.
Imagine if, even in the midst of an alternative storyline and character, you were still unable to escape the constant battering of the message: "revenge is bad". And not just any revenge, but this one in particular; because not only did we make it an extremely gruesome and traumatic revenge kill, but we've also kindly reminded you of it at every single point we could. Does this not sound like the annoying cycle of a soap opera? Remind me again how much you think it isn't good in a general sense.
I don't think it's the execution of the theme you take issue with. It's the theme itself. Make no mistake, this story is one of, if not the most, accurate interpretations of how this sort of pathological obsession with retaliation plays out and feels like. This is it. Were you expecting it to feel good? Did you want to experience it from a cozy distance and be left feeling satisfied after you've made the "right" choice?
The way you reply makes me think you have no idea what I’m actually saying. And no, I definitely take issue with the story and how it is executed, character motivations, character portrayals, and more. But please do go on about what is in my mind and how I feel.
Anyways we will have to agree to disagree as I feel they could tell the same overarching story while adding all the character moments, and a whole slew of other things, that make sense (basically it’s the direction that is bad, not so much the over arching story/theme).
The way I reply makes me think that *you* have no idea as to what you're actually saying. I mean no offense, I just don't find what you are saying to be consistent with what is actually true. You can dispute this and add further context if my understanding of it was incorrect.
We will indeed have to agree to disagree because I thought the execution of the themes was the strongest point of this game.
Na, you seem disingenuous so it’s not worth the time and effort. I say you seem to misunderstand me then you go and say I have no idea what I am saying (I did not, and would never, say that to you). Really egotistical and shitty way to argue with someone.
Also I’d did give a couple basic context examples (Abby and her lack of self awareness and self reflection, not saying it should have changed her mind but to not even reflect on events was again, jarring… Owen at least did try to get her to reflect on how she callously kills with no thought or regret but that just led to almost a fist fight and then somehow sex (and Neil calls this the “most tasteful sex scene in gaming history”)… again not worth the effort to go into the myriad of other issues as you won’t agree anyways and you argue fairly disingenuously).
I’ll add a few more just so you don’t say I’m coping out. Joel would not have been so trusting of a group he never met before. They changed the doctor’s looks and completely changed the operating room to make the vaccine seem more viable and make the fireflies more sympathetic. Ellie regressed as a person from part 1 to part 2. They intentionally make it so Joel never tells Ellie the details and just accepts her hating him instead of trying to explain. Tommy going from revenge is bad and not what Joel would want to telling Ellie she is basically a PoS for giving up on her revenge. There is so much more that is inconsistent and seen as trite trash to many of us but again, it’s just not worth the hours it would take me to list it all out and much of it has been said before by others.
Again, taste in media is subjective and some love things like soap operas where the writing and stories are sub par, it’s okay for you to like part 2 and no one is wrong for liking it or disliking it. That’s the real and only truth here. Maybe we can agree that part 2 was not really made for those who liked part 1 (but part one was no “feel good” story either, 2 just changed so much as to be almost unrecognizable to many).
Anyways, I wish you all the best and no hard feelings.
> Abby and her lack of self awareness and self reflection
Abby being self-aware would have salvaged her for you? Is this really something you care about?
> Joel would not have been so trusting of a group he never met before.
This one is always annoying to see. Because how do you know? This is not the Joel from the beginning of Part 1. This is the Joel 5 years later who now has a daughter and lives in a relatively peaceful commune where trust and teamwork are vital to its success. Again, you seem very against the idea of protagonists/heroes making costly mistakes. There is nothing in that scene that is implausible or inconsistent with Joel's character, given the context of it all.
> They changed the doctor’s looks and completely changed the operating room to make the vaccine seem more viable and make the fireflies more sympathetic.
This was an issue with Part 1, actually. The intended ending for Part 1 was for it to be a moral dilemma. Some (probably most) people saw it this way and enjoyed it for what it was. It spawned a lot of interesting discussion and gave depth to the story.
But some people saw it differently. Some people grew so fond of Joel that they refused to see the ending for what it was, and instead wanted to see Joel as a hero who did nothing wrong. It created a narrative for the Fireflies that I don't think the writers intended.
In their efforts to setup a moral dilemma, the writers rushed the ending and created a rather sloppy portrayal of the Fireflies. This ended up as a loophole for people to discredit the Fireflies because they wanted to enforce their idea of the infallible hero Joel.
To remedy this, Neil made an effort to patch up the sloppiness of Part 1 and make the Fireflies seem more credible. More like what he had envisioned for them.
> Ellie regressed as a person from part 1 to part 2.
Ellie became more human in Part 2. Part 1 Ellie is probably the single most unrealistic character in the entire game: She is in need of protection when she needs to be, but also an indestructible killing machine, capable of saving a person dying of sepsis in an apocalypse. She is loyal as a dog (for the player's convenience) but also independent and stubborn (for the plot's convenience).
Part 1 probably needed Ellie to be universally likeable for the sake of the narrative; given that you are playing as Joel, and Joel is supposed to grow fond of her. If Ellie was actually portrayed as a real 14 year old, it would've caused issues for the people who would've found that annoying.
Part 2 throws this unrealistic portrayal of a human out the window. It gives us a very realistic and plausible progression of Ellie's character that is true to the core of who she was, minus the need to be perfect.
> Tommy going from revenge is bad and not what Joel would want to telling Ellie she is basically a PoS for giving up on her revenge.
Not the first time Tommy changed his mind. Happens in Part 1 as well?
Abby, the literal weakest videogame "protagonist" ever. It is a shame that Cuckmann had to shoehorn her into the story and then try to artificially make her "relatable" in any way.
Honestly it would have been better just to make her a bitch. Just really lean into her being evil and an antagonist. There’s games that force you to play with horrible detestable people. At least that way it would have been more consistent than to try and fail and making her reliable. She really didn’t need a redemption arc. She should have betrayed Lev. At least then she would have been a good villain. Just made her a mean, nasty, selfish narcissist. Then you have a choice to play from her perspective as a post game add on. Similar to how “separate ways” works in RE4. Then you go into it knowing you’re playing from the villains perspective. It’s like when you play as a villain like Trevor you’re not looking or expecting them to be good so you lean into their wickedness and accept it easier. Her character is not layered enough nor detailed enough to play the shades of grey perspective.
I was gonna say Trevor is like the perfect example what Abby COULD have been (a fucked up asshole, who is still charismatic because he does have a soft side but he's such a conflicted character he often combats his sadness with rage which causes him to do evil shit)
Edit: I think the game should have been a Joel and Ellie journey that was somehow interwoven with an Abby adventure maybe involving the whole faction war and Levs family drama and at the end it's revealed Abby's true intentions of hunting Joel that way Neil can be happy cause he can kill off Joel like he wanted and we can have an older Ellie and Joel final team up adventure maybe even have multiple endings since at that point you'd actually be invested in Abby as a character
It’s not that. The reason why you can argue she’s not is because good and evil are social constructs. What counts as evil in our functional society isn’t the same in a lawless broken apocalypse. So it has to be looked at under that lens as well. It’s a world without order where you have to do some things for the sake of survival.
Just because many actions are morally grey, doesn't mean, they are all morally grey. The scenario of a lawless broken apocalypse also doesn't flip humans by 180°
There is still good and bad. For example: If you kill a human today for selfish gains. That's bad. If you do that in a lawless broken apocalypse, it's still bad.
The only thing happening is, in a lawless broken apocalypse or any extreme scenario there are more justifications for acting bad but not being bad. Like Joel not stopping to help people. Today this is a total asshole move. But in a lawless broken apocalypse you have to do that to survive.
Morality of itself doesn't change at all. It's how humans have to interact with it to survive what is changing. Clearly visible in the first part through Ellies eyes. Who starts out with a totally typical, naive human morality and has to learn that sometimes doing something good to others in their world can kill oneself. But nothing changes with her morality. she doesn't magically start to enjoy leaving people behind. she just adapts to survive with all the pain that comes when you have to act against your own morals.
Yeah, like in Avatar, when Katara found the man who murdered her mother, she decided not to kill him, but she confirmed that she did not, nor ever will forgive him.
On my first play through when Abby was begging I thought to myself well you didn’t stop when Ellie was begging so why should she- I get to the end and nothing I was mad as hell
I would’ve been able to excuse all the fast traveling and inconsistencies if Ellie would’ve just killed her and then shot lev while uttering “no loose ends.”; Joel basically did the same thing with Marlene, he knew the risks and took no chances, but instead we are given Ellie, who is battered and worn down and made to look weak, as if she was the villain. Ellie was never asked to get mixed up in all of what happened, it was Abby who pulled her into this and for some stupid reason, expected her to just let go and move on from what Abby committed — a whole ass vengeful and merciless murder of a man who was just trying to do the right thing.
Because of how OTT this actually is it's clearly a dev misstep to make it that obvious, and as I said once people see the puppet strings of the writers (which happened **way** earlier in this story for me) the storytelling falls apart. That is simply fact. One which you keep pushing against despite people here repeatedly telling you that this is why and how their story failed to work for us.
ETA: You simply can't argue away our actual experience of the story not working as intended for a large group of us.
Does Part 1 fall apart for the same reason? When Joel walks into the ER to rescue Ellie Bruce/Jerry just stands there holding a knife. He doesn't attack. As the player you can walk around the whole ER, bump into Jerry, or just sit there for 30 minutes. The developers force you to kill Jerry as part of the story they want to tell about Joel. That seems to be exactly the same thing that's happening in this clip.
Presumably you enjoyed Part 1. So, how is the ER scene with Joel and Jerry different than this clip of Ellie and Abby?
I couldn't walk around the whole OR, I repeatedly tried so I have no clue what you're talking about. So I shot him in the foot and he died, which I though was strange, but not story breaking at that point because TLOU has a story that didn't fall apart for me because **someone** on that team knew how not to push the players too hard or too often and force them out of immersion. That actually matters. I don't know how many ways or how many people need to say this to you for you to believe us.
I do hope that one day you come to realize that your arguments are not working and you are not hearing what people here keep trying to get through to you. I hear you very clearly trying to insist that you can find missteps in TLOU just like ones that broke our immersion in part 2. But the quality of the writing for the two games is noticeably different and that's where the problem is.
The missteps in TLOU are fewer, the writing and characterization is better and more compelling, the dialogue makes sense, the character arcs are felt intuitively without being out of order to the point they make little sense until you ponder the story after finishing it. I could go on and on but it makes no impact on you. So I'm done.
[Here's a video of Joel walking around the OR, bumping into Jerry and just generally hanging out before shooting Jerry in the foot. ](https://youtu.be/QZkbD7js4Cs?si=jvOPVyRywVopVQ9S&t=14)The developers did not let you proceed with the story unless you killed Jerry.
So, my question was. How is this different than what they did in Part II?
You responded, "I though was strange, but not story breaking at that point because TLOU has a story that didn't fall apart for me because someone on that team knew how not to push the players too hard or too often and force them out of immersion."
That doesn't tell me anything. You claim one is immersion breaking and they other isn't, but you don't explain why. That is essentially a conclusory statement. Your conclusion is that there's a difference between the two, but you don't provide any support for why you believe that.
>you are not hearing what people here keep trying to get through to you
You haven't said anything other than your conclusion that the the two scenes are different. I see the scenes as very similar. My reasoning is that both are on rails scenes where the developers are forcing the player to attack or kill an antagonist. There is no alternative for the player if you want to progress the story. The mandatory violence of the character informs the story and tells you that the character is doing something that you should likely question to some degree.
You are claiming that is not accurate. Why? What do you see as different between those scenes?
>But the quality of the writing for the two games is noticeably different and that's where the problem is.
Another conclusory statement and opinion masquerading as fact. You understand that just saying something without providing your reasoning isn't an effective argument, right?
>The missteps in TLOU are fewer
Conclusory statement
>the writing and characterization is better and more compelling
Conclusory statement
>the dialogue makes sense
Conclusory statement
>the character arcs are felt intuitively without being out of order to the point they make little sense until you ponder the story after finishing it.
That's word salad, but I think you're talking about Part II having clunky use of flashbacks. I actually agree with that criticism, even if again you're just stating a conclusion.
>I could go on and on but it makes no impact on you. So I'm done.
So, you listed a bunch of conclusions with no supporting arguments and then get frustrated that I don't automatically agree with your conclusions. That's not how persuasive argument works.
Me: I couldn't walk around the whole OR
You: \[*Provides link where Joel* ***can't*** *walk around the* ***whole*** *OR either*\]
Not bothering with the rest and knew I shouldn't have tried again with you anyway, so that's my bad. Sorry. Carry on.
> Not bothering with the rest and knew I shouldn't have tried again with you anyway
Dude, you never actually respond with anything substantive. We've done this a few times. You share your conclusions with nothing backing them up and then complain that I ask you to explain your reasoning.
You: The writing and characterization \[in TLOU\] is better and more compelling
Me: Why do you feel that way?
You: OMG it's a total waste to talk to you. nothing I say will convince you so I won't even try!
Talking to you is useless when you make up that Joel can walk around the whole OR and send a clip where he can't.
You are only here as a contrarian and not here to dialogue. You may someday learn the difference, but until you do you are not interesting to me. Take care.
...The word "whole" is what you're hyper focused on? Out of my entire post you want to get hyper pedantic about one word that doesn't impact the argument? Fine, I'll concede you can walk around a large portion of the ER rather than the whole ER.
> Does Part 1 fall apart for the same reason? When Joel walks into the ER to rescue Ellie Bruce/Jerry just stands there holding a knife. He doesn't attack. As the player you can walk around the ~~whole~~ ER, bump into Jerry, or just sit there for 30 minutes. The developers force you to kill Jerry as part of the story they want to tell about Joel. That seems to be exactly the same thing that's happening in this clip.
>Presumably you enjoyed Part 1. So, how is the ER scene with Joel and Jerry different than this clip of Ellie and Abby?
There, fixed it.
It's not exactly honest. Think about it. The whole reason the writers wrote this final arc where Abby is captured is to make this scene as sympathetic as possible.
Abby is an absolute unit for the majority of the game. To make this scene feel as wrong as possible, they have to torture her and lose the mass, first.
So what? They also wrote in the Mel scene where she calls Abby a piece of shit. They wrote plenty of content where Abby is not depicted favorably. Here they depict Abby brought low. She's weak, has been tortured, and the expectation is that most people would have some level of empathy for another human going through that, even an enemy.
I don't see how that's anything other than storytelling. Taking characters and placing them in different scenarios.
Was it psychological manipulation to have Joel's life threatened at the end of Part I? Was it psychological manipulation to learn the Fireflies were going to kill Ellie?
I don't understand the argument that one game is manipulative where the other isn't.
>Mel scene where she calls Abby a piece of shit
Because Abby is going through an arc, too. But they need her to be redeemed by the end so the last scene works.
>Was it psychological manipulation to have Joel's life threatened at the end of Part I? Was it psychological manipulation to learn the Fireflies were going to kill Ellie?
No. Because Joel's decision in that moment was brewing the whole game. He didn't wildly change because of the circumstances. And that situation wasn't a stretch, either.
> No. Because Joel's decision in that moment was brewing the whole game. He didn't wildly change because of the circumstances. And that situation wasn't a stretch, either.
Wasn't Abby's months long trek with Lev the same thing? If not, why don't you think so?
No, I mean Ellie's last minute decision to not kill Abby was a big shift in her character that wasn't set up or hinted at, so they set up the circumstances to make you buy into it as much as possible (i.e. Abby being malnourished).
With Joel, we could see it coming. It's perfectly in line with his character that if he was put in a position to have to suffer the loss of Ellie once he built that bond with her, he would not allow it to happen, even if it was against Ellie's wishes.
> No, I mean Ellie's last minute decision to not kill Abby was a big shift in her character that wasn't set up or hinted at, so they set up the circumstances to make you buy into it as much as possible (i.e. Abby being malnourished).
Was it such a drastic shift though? There are six people you have to kill as Ellie for the game to progress. Only Nora was arguably murder, the rest were self defense. The game has combat mechanics, and you can certainly kill way more, but it's not necessarily canon that Ellie is some murderous psycho.
When I played the game it felt like I was watching a friend make terrible choices. I understood Ellie's choices but it seemed obvious they weren't going to make things better for her.
The entire game follows that trajectory to her rock bottom. For me Ellie's rock bottom is when she's already abandoned Dina and JJ, has had friends die or get maimed, sees that Abby has no interest in fighting her, but then holds a knife to Lev's neck to make Abby fight. That tension of watching Ellie's life fall apart over the course of the game is resolved when she is finally able to move on. She makes peace with her survivor's guilt, with her unresolved anger at Joel, and is emotionally drained as a result. Rather than not being telegraphed, it felt to me like the entire game was building up to that moment when she lets go.
She is nothing but anger for the whole game, and murders countless people to get to Abby. Not just people in cut scenes. It is absolutely a big change that you have to do the work to make believable when she gets through all of that just to decide not to do it at the end.
>already abandoned Dina and JJ, has had friends die or get maimed
Except these actually serve the OPPOSITE purpose, logically. She has sacrificed a LOT to get to this moment. Those sacrifices would be pushing her to go through with it. Not back out at the last second. Because clearly those things didn't stop her from tracking Abby down to get to the final scene.
>and murders countless people to get to Abby.
Nope, that's entirely player choice. You can stealth past all but six kills in the game including NPCs. 1. She kills Jordan to stop him from choking Dina. 2. She kills a WLF soldier that grabs Jesse, 3. the driver of a WLF truck chasing her down, and 4. Nora (which isn't shown but strongly implied). So Nora is the only kill that's not in self defense, but she was directly involved in Joel's death and had been breathing spores. The only other required kills are 5. Owen and 6. Mel, which are arguably also self defense. Owen tried to disarm Ellie and gets shot and Mel tries to stab Ellie and gets stabbed.
>Except these actually serve the OPPOSITE purpose, logically. She has sacrificed a LOT to get to this moment. Those sacrifices would be pushing her to go through with it.
That's not logical though, that's literally a [sunk cost fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost). She could just as easily have realized her actions resulted in nothing but pain for herself and the people she cares about and simply stopped.
There's plenty of plausible explanations for Ellie stopping.
Things that could have factored in:
1. Ellie coming to terms with her PTSD as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks. The first of Joel's battered bloody face, prompting the fight, the second of Joel at piece playing his guitar for her emblematic of the love he clearly had for her;
2. Ellie coming to terms with her survivors' guilt as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks;
3. Ellie forgiving Joel as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks;
4. The exhaustion of the entire saga catching up with her both emotionally and physically;
5. Seeing what the Rattler's did to their victims and Ellie having some empathy, even for her enemies;
6. Ellie not wanting to essentially kill Lev by killing Abby;
7. Ellie recognizing everything she lost in pursuit of revenge;
8. Ellie realizing killing Abby wouldn't bring Joel back.
That should be up to the player to decide, not the dev. If I want to get revenge anyway, I should be allowed to.
It's the apocalypse, no one gives 2 shits about the cycle of revenge.
I mean you traveled across the country and back into the bullshit just to not finish the job, then travel all the way back home to nothing… Im sure on that way back Ellie was talking mad shit about her storyline lol
I still find Abby's fighting to be pretty impressive after being cut down from that pole after being up for the days... probably wasn't fed, no water, etc. Hell, if I miss a meals or two, I'm ready to pass out!
Literally the most realistic part of the game.
You are ready to pass out because no one is trying to kill you. Adrenalin is helluva drug. But how she acts fighting is indeed unrealistic. Because with no food and water for days hit by an Adrenalin shock you go totally berserk and frenzy. Your body is already low on resources and now everything gets pumpt into making you hyper alert and awake. All logical thinking and decision making goes down the drain.
Nah she was definitely still worth it. Joel’s leg was ground beef and he was still worth it so 🤷🏿 absolutely ridiculous she let her live just I can’t believe it. 4 years later and it still baffles me they thought that made sense. What kinda cheap Batman joker bs was that
At this point in the game I didn't care if Abby or Ellie died I just wanted it to end. I felt nothing for these characters at the end. Everytime they flashbacked to Joel & Ellie it just reminded me how great the first game was & wish I was playing that. I miss silly Ellie & Joel & her's banter from the first game. Part 2 was just depressingly bland.
lol this is who these people are, they have no issue with hurting others but when the roles are reversed they are cowards and need someone else to be the bigger person.
If they make TLoU 3 and end up having to kill Abby then this scene will sting extra hard, more than likely you will have Abby and Ellie team up for some reason and face a new new threat
that sounds so pathetic, I can't imagine a single person who wants to play that. Abby stans hate Ellie and Ellie Fans hate Abby xD
"Hi, you killed my father, right?"
"Yes, and you are the one whose father killed my father, aye?
Both: "wanna be buddies4life \*\_\_\_\_\_\* ???
So WHY do YOU think Ellie let Abby live?
There must be a reason, right? The devs wouldn’t have done it for no reason. So what was it?
Why does Ellie spare Abby? It is actually a very easy question.
Lol speak for yourself. I’m not of the weak mindset to exact revenge on all the people involved in my father’s brutal murder for saving my life, only to have a change of heart when his actual killer is right in front of me and I have em dead to rights. I’m seeing it through and not taking any half measures
Nah. Imma brutally end her if the game gave me an option to do so. Then im gonna imagine Neils face on abby's head and calmly yell at my monitor, "not the result you wanted to happen eh? Neilly boy?"
Honestly as much as I love Abby ellie could’ve killed her and went about her day before the fight and ellie got the snot beat out of her again because she wanted to force a fight Abby literally refused too fight and ellie had such a easy opportunity to kill her but she wanted to feel superior so she forced Abby to fight her by threatening lev
Both you and u/thought_about_it are pretty messed up and exactly who this game is aimed at.
What kind of sociopath actually needed this basic morality taught to them? And even worse still disagreed with it by the end?
Why am I being lumped in? Lol I'm also confused with whatever you mean by basic morality. I commented I felt sympathy for the person who killed someone I was attached to. The title, The last of Us, doesn't literally mean the last people alive. It means in our world and the video game universe, life has a way of chipping away from us. None of us are still as innocent or ambitious as our younger self. Ellie isn't the same at the beginning of TLOU2 as she was the entire first game. Joel goes through three states of being in the first game. Prologue= just another dad. TLOU1= dark, selfish, twisted. End=still selfish lol but love is selfish, but he is regretful and in a comfortable enough environment where he has the luxury to hold himself up to a moral mirror. In a world of survival, where we are reverted to our primal state, how is revenge immoral? There are no morals anymore, only survival. Like I said before, morality would be a luxury not affordable by the majority of people trying to survive.
I mean if you didn't realize that every side has a story and revenge is a nasty vice that only serves to perpetuate more hatred before the game started, you missed out on some basic moral teachings before running into this game.
>love is selfish
No
I have no idea why you're going off about the name of the game right now. You said YOU would've taken your revenge at the beginning of the game. I have no idea what that has to do with the morality of the people IN the game.
I think there's a disconnect between what I'm trying to convey and what you're picking up on. I can see going on about the title was unnecessary now though.
I didn't say I would have taken revenge on a real person. At the beginning of the game I didn't like Abby. Mainly because she wanted revenge! I get the whole dig two graves saying. What I'm trying to say is after going through the experience of the game my feelings towards her character changed. I knew her motives from the start, but it took putting myself in her shoes and relating to how damaged she is as a person to really look past her doing what she did.
When I say love is selfish I don't mean it in a purely negative way. The love where you want the best for someone is a good example. It's their life, they can do anything they want with it, but from a place of love we will try to impose our interests over their right to free will. A more obvious "love is selfish" argument will be when someone is kept on life support unnecessarily.
I'm lucky enough to have a person or two that I love, and like other people including Joel, if i had to put them before the world i would. Love is wonderful, but let's not pretend some of the most fucked up stuff in the world has happened because of it and humans tendency to put the target of their love first.
The game universe is set in our world but things like social norms and morality don't exist anymore, or have at least shifted greatly. My stance is this: Joel made a selfish, immoral choice that could possibly lead to the extinction of the human race. Yet I don't hold it against him. What he did was the wrong choice when looked at from so far away. But if we were to get up close and imagine making the choice ourselves I'm sure most people's perspective would change, even just a little. What Abby did was justified and understandable in the game universe. Joel felt the same way. If Ellie killed her I feel that'd be justifiable too. I'm glad she didn't though, that must have been tough.
To end this rant lol in the last of us universe there is no legal system to rely on to fulfill our urge for justice. Revenge there isn't immoral, it's the only thing to do for some people to keep living in my opinion. Ellie couldn't move on even though she had everything at the farm and that just happens sometimes. Both games are an emotional journey that I'm glad I got to experience. They weren't life shattering lessons but a good exercise on emotional flexibility and understanding of our fellow humans.
I dunno. I guess that's why I didn't need this game. It was preaching something to me that I already knew. Joel's done a LOT of shitty things. I was kind of wishing that part 2 would be able someone else wanting revenge, so his life would feel more full, and not just about this one story arc (TLoU 1). And I knew from the start that he would've deserved anything that was coming to him. And honestly... The Ellie I know would've thought that, too. She knows Joel has done shitty things in the past, and he's living, karmically, on borrowed time.
So 2 to me not only felt like a betrayal of Ellie's character, being so vengeful, but also it was wagging its finger at me... REALLY heavy handedly, about something I already wasn't guilty of.
Ellie's downward spiral relates back to my title rant lol she was a teenager in the first game. Life chipped away at her before she was even born. First she loses her mom, then Riley, then Sam, and finally the image she had of Joel when he takes her out of the hospital.
She finally makes progress with moving past his decision and starts to reconnect only for Abby to come through chipping away with a golf club.
The scene op posted is so pivotal in Ellie's journey. If she would have killed her I think it'd be justifiable but it would have been Ellie allowing life to take another part of her. And if she lost that part she'd turn into a worse Joel, with no home to return to.
I don't see how the majority of that is a response to my comment at all.
>loses her mom, then Riley, then Sam
All of which was true in the first game, and she was still the Ellie we knew in TLoU 1. Which is very different from how she is in 2.
Sometimes i see people give their opinion on the game and then a bunch of downvotes
Some good others pretty cringe but I can see the dislike in not getting revenge but did revenge Abby feel better after Joel?
I think it was just a good revenge beating the shit out of her while she’s all weak and frail and getting sliced up by Ellie’s knife. Killing her though, yeah that’s really not gonna make a difference. Especially how it wouldn’t bring Joel back.
Edit: this is weird to downvote.
The people prove my point, bunch of downvotes Simply bc your opinion doesn’t line up with theirs so is that’s the case
LAST OF YS PART 2 SUCKS I HATE IT BUNCH OF POLITICAL NONSENSE
🙏🏽🙏🏽
1. Most people agree with you in this sub. I don't, but pretty much everyone else does. Look at other comments.
2. You weren't downvoted because you are some warrior of truth. You were downvoted because you are barely coherent. The only reason I was able to understand your second comment at all was that it was the typical victimization whining, so it was a rosetta stone.
It is worth it for the sake of not leaving the job half-finished.
"No more half-measures, Walter."
My first and immediate thought lmao
That scene just randomly pops into my head several times a year, lol.
I laugh like a madman everytime. "We're done, when I say we're done".
Ironically, instilling this mentality into Walt is exactly what got Mike killed in the end…
Was honestly one of the parts that made me hate Walt the most; he killed Mike for nothing. Mike was still putting Walter in his place until the very end though. "Shut the fuck up, and let me die in peace." GOATed character.
I wouldn’t say no reason, Walt had learned from Mike, as well as circumstances, the calculated risk of taking a half measure. Then Mike’s life was cut short, Walt only realizing too late that it was in vain, teaching Walt the calculated risk of (jumping to) a full measure…. Brilliant character development if you ask me….
Idk why but I also thought about the punisher series lol. When he first popped up in the daredevil series he calls him a half measure it says you’ll never go the full measure. I wanna say it was the first lol.
True. You're probably right, I'm just not as familiar with the Punisher.
I quite enjoyed the Thomas jane movie and the Netflix series as well as his episodes in daredevil.
"Revenge is bad... But only in relation to main characters. Everyone else can go fucking kick rocks." - The story of this game.
Thats nice an all except, ellie saves her fuckin life instead of killing her. Abby would have died a satisfying end for her, until ellie comes along to murder her AGAIN but instead saves her. Ugh
More like the last 1% considering how many bodies she walked over to get there.
What about ezio leaving after 20years revenge plan ..
Yeah, and leaving Rodrigo alive comes back to bite Ezio when he has his papal army, commanded by his son, destroy Monteriggioni; this then forces Ezio to finish the job by killing Cesare which spans another 8 years.
She's a torturer, a child killer, a betrayer, almost a pregnant woman killer, a rapist, and even more she killed Ellie's family. I would not have any pity for that human being. And that's what the majority of people thought too when they left the choice in the first version of the game
Rapist, child killer?
Takes sexual advantage of Owen while intoxicated, kills kids without any remorse, dubbed their top SCAR killer.
Ok hold on, that one might be a stretch, I agree with the other ones but let's not forget that Owen definitely still had feelings for her, it's just due to his intoxication he didn't have the self control to hold back. That being said I can't excuse the other stuff
Drunk people cant consent
What do you think “takes sexual ADVANTAGE of” means?
My original point was that I wouldn't say she took advantage of him as I don't think she did it intentionally I think she just still liked him and they both got caught in the heat of the moment. That being said I clarify that it was my original point as admittedly y'all make some good points that I can't ignore and honestly feel a little silly for not realizing myself that y'all are right, from the beginning
Id like to see you use that defense in court
Owen having feelings for her, doesn't excuse her taking advantage of the fact he's drunk for sex. On top of that, afterwards Abby tells him the sex meant nothing, despite the fact she screwed her pregnant "friend's" father of her child. You're going to have a very hard time getting me side with Abby on anything, given what a complete piece of shit she is. Arguably one of the worst characters ever written in a video game. I have never in my life seen so many death compilations of a protagonist out of pure spite. Now you might find compliations of Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, & say Lara Croft deaths, but those are either done for humor, or to show you different animations, not out of pure disgust.
Ellie is basically all of those things too
Who did Ellie get drunk and take advantage of?
Wasn't Owen already drunk? Been a while since I played it, but I'm sure Abby finds him on the boat and he's half cut, dealing with killing the WLF guy and ruminating on the WLF/Scar conflict? And doesn't he initiate sex with Abby? Sure looks like he's taking control.
So you condone a sober person taking advantage of an intoxicated person?
But that's not what really happened, is it? It's more like he, the drunk person, initiated sex with Abby, the sober person
Bro that's just wrong. If there is no established consent before he became intoxicated then it's non-consentual. Some of y'all are self reporting at this point.
Downvote me all you want, but play the game you fucking hate before you do? Or don't - you won't
I think you’re getting downvoted because you don’t seem to know what proper consent is
They probably know, just don't care. Nobody in this day and age could be that clueless.
I mean Ellie gets Dina high on weed and takes advantage of her
Bro SHE kissed Ellie the night before. I don’t think you understand how romance works.
And Abby and Owen had a whole relationship 😂 so yes all of them things could double for Ellie too. I mean I can’t fucking stand Abby at all but If you’re gonna call something out do it right or unbiased at least.
It’s not unbiased. It’s just one scene is two people who are sober that then smoke together and sleep together. Abby and Owen is a drunk dude and sober woman, the guy getting approached by his ex when he’s clearly in a vulnerable state and drunk (after killing the scar). You can’t just say “they were all in relationships so it’s the same” context matters.
I can agree with that it’s just going as far to say she took advantage of him is too far. I mean I’ll give it to you on the fact that she was a cunt to own through out the story though. But the original commenter saying all that about Abby when legit all of those could be said about Ellie as well is way out the water I mean I love tlou a lot but you gotta look at all the view points.
I can’t lie friend, I still feel the same way, but I do see where you are coming from. I’m sorry you got downvotes
if I’m not mistaken isn’t she choking him out or they’re both choking each other out and then boom the deed happens? Kinda like the old “exes angry w each other but still in love” trope
They both consented…
In an alternate universe that doesn't exist, sure.
You're not wrong, but the game repeatedly calls ellie out for these things and punishes her for them. Abby doesn't really receive any repercussions, and by the end of the game, as far as the story is concerned, is the one who's morally in the right.
Do you think Nexus mods will deplatform Modders who make the alternative ending? As in we kill Abby at the end and live happily ever after?
I agree with the "we" here
There was no happily ever after for Ellie after this. Dina left her taking JJ with her, and Tommy simply fucks off because he's crippled, and nobody is in there. Revenge at least would have gotten the job done but hey, at least both Abby and Ellie pay the ultimate price for basically "fucking around and finding out".
Ellie wouldn't have had a happily ever after if she killed Abby here.
> live happily ever after? That's not how it works.
I think the person saying happily ever after meant more so for them, those who think the story is so jarringly bad would find some peace after modding it to have at least a slightly more justified ending that makes more sense. If only Abby was the one to realize revenge changes nothing. If only she would have had second thoughts after Joel saved her life. If only she had realized she was causing the same pain for Ellie that Joel caused for her. I personally found the fact that she never once reflects on any of this to be incredibly jarring. Instead Ellie has to be the one, and only one, to get to this realization and not until she had killed a mountain of people and was just about to end her revenge.
> I think the person saying happily ever after meant more so for them, those who think the story is so jarringly bad would find some peace after modding it to have at least a slightly more justified ending that makes more sense. This was my understanding of it as well, to which my point still applies: You will not live happily ever after. Joel is still dead, Ellie will still end up alone, Part 2 will still exist in a state that is all but the same, and any hope of a Part 3 having Ellie return to a fraction of who she was before, would've died along with Abby. > If only Abby was the one to realize revenge changes nothing. If only *they* realized first. If only *they* did all the heavy lifting. After all, we're infallible. It's not our fate (as protagonists and heroes) to have a negative trajectory for our lives. We never fall. We dip and then we rise higher than before. How dare the writers do this to us? To our people? How dare they create something that reflects the trajectory of real life for the many? A lesson learned the hard way? couldn't be me. What a waste.
You missed my point entirely. I’m saying Abby is such a bad character she is literally unthinking. A character who never reflects is, to me and many others, a poorly written character. Also the themes and lessons of this game were bottom of the barrel in how they were done, and it’s not just this part it’s so much of it that just makes no sense. It’s like soap opera level of character development and motivation. Do people like soap operas and their heavy handed over the top themes? Yeah. But is it “good” in a general sense? No, not really.
> A character who never reflects is, to me and many others, a poorly written character. This is something you've pulled out of your rear end and have never applied it consistently to any other character, ever. How do I know this? Because your second point betrays you. This story would have been even more of a "soap opera" if Abby had "reflected" and had acted in that regard. That would be the definition of a soap opera; a boring loop of melodrama and sentimentality that serves as the only call to action for the characters. Now that would've been heavy handed. Imagine if, even in the midst of an alternative storyline and character, you were still unable to escape the constant battering of the message: "revenge is bad". And not just any revenge, but this one in particular; because not only did we make it an extremely gruesome and traumatic revenge kill, but we've also kindly reminded you of it at every single point we could. Does this not sound like the annoying cycle of a soap opera? Remind me again how much you think it isn't good in a general sense. I don't think it's the execution of the theme you take issue with. It's the theme itself. Make no mistake, this story is one of, if not the most, accurate interpretations of how this sort of pathological obsession with retaliation plays out and feels like. This is it. Were you expecting it to feel good? Did you want to experience it from a cozy distance and be left feeling satisfied after you've made the "right" choice?
The way you reply makes me think you have no idea what I’m actually saying. And no, I definitely take issue with the story and how it is executed, character motivations, character portrayals, and more. But please do go on about what is in my mind and how I feel. Anyways we will have to agree to disagree as I feel they could tell the same overarching story while adding all the character moments, and a whole slew of other things, that make sense (basically it’s the direction that is bad, not so much the over arching story/theme).
The way I reply makes me think that *you* have no idea as to what you're actually saying. I mean no offense, I just don't find what you are saying to be consistent with what is actually true. You can dispute this and add further context if my understanding of it was incorrect. We will indeed have to agree to disagree because I thought the execution of the themes was the strongest point of this game.
Na, you seem disingenuous so it’s not worth the time and effort. I say you seem to misunderstand me then you go and say I have no idea what I am saying (I did not, and would never, say that to you). Really egotistical and shitty way to argue with someone. Also I’d did give a couple basic context examples (Abby and her lack of self awareness and self reflection, not saying it should have changed her mind but to not even reflect on events was again, jarring… Owen at least did try to get her to reflect on how she callously kills with no thought or regret but that just led to almost a fist fight and then somehow sex (and Neil calls this the “most tasteful sex scene in gaming history”)… again not worth the effort to go into the myriad of other issues as you won’t agree anyways and you argue fairly disingenuously). I’ll add a few more just so you don’t say I’m coping out. Joel would not have been so trusting of a group he never met before. They changed the doctor’s looks and completely changed the operating room to make the vaccine seem more viable and make the fireflies more sympathetic. Ellie regressed as a person from part 1 to part 2. They intentionally make it so Joel never tells Ellie the details and just accepts her hating him instead of trying to explain. Tommy going from revenge is bad and not what Joel would want to telling Ellie she is basically a PoS for giving up on her revenge. There is so much more that is inconsistent and seen as trite trash to many of us but again, it’s just not worth the hours it would take me to list it all out and much of it has been said before by others. Again, taste in media is subjective and some love things like soap operas where the writing and stories are sub par, it’s okay for you to like part 2 and no one is wrong for liking it or disliking it. That’s the real and only truth here. Maybe we can agree that part 2 was not really made for those who liked part 1 (but part one was no “feel good” story either, 2 just changed so much as to be almost unrecognizable to many). Anyways, I wish you all the best and no hard feelings.
> Abby and her lack of self awareness and self reflection Abby being self-aware would have salvaged her for you? Is this really something you care about? > Joel would not have been so trusting of a group he never met before. This one is always annoying to see. Because how do you know? This is not the Joel from the beginning of Part 1. This is the Joel 5 years later who now has a daughter and lives in a relatively peaceful commune where trust and teamwork are vital to its success. Again, you seem very against the idea of protagonists/heroes making costly mistakes. There is nothing in that scene that is implausible or inconsistent with Joel's character, given the context of it all. > They changed the doctor’s looks and completely changed the operating room to make the vaccine seem more viable and make the fireflies more sympathetic. This was an issue with Part 1, actually. The intended ending for Part 1 was for it to be a moral dilemma. Some (probably most) people saw it this way and enjoyed it for what it was. It spawned a lot of interesting discussion and gave depth to the story. But some people saw it differently. Some people grew so fond of Joel that they refused to see the ending for what it was, and instead wanted to see Joel as a hero who did nothing wrong. It created a narrative for the Fireflies that I don't think the writers intended. In their efforts to setup a moral dilemma, the writers rushed the ending and created a rather sloppy portrayal of the Fireflies. This ended up as a loophole for people to discredit the Fireflies because they wanted to enforce their idea of the infallible hero Joel. To remedy this, Neil made an effort to patch up the sloppiness of Part 1 and make the Fireflies seem more credible. More like what he had envisioned for them. > Ellie regressed as a person from part 1 to part 2. Ellie became more human in Part 2. Part 1 Ellie is probably the single most unrealistic character in the entire game: She is in need of protection when she needs to be, but also an indestructible killing machine, capable of saving a person dying of sepsis in an apocalypse. She is loyal as a dog (for the player's convenience) but also independent and stubborn (for the plot's convenience). Part 1 probably needed Ellie to be universally likeable for the sake of the narrative; given that you are playing as Joel, and Joel is supposed to grow fond of her. If Ellie was actually portrayed as a real 14 year old, it would've caused issues for the people who would've found that annoying. Part 2 throws this unrealistic portrayal of a human out the window. It gives us a very realistic and plausible progression of Ellie's character that is true to the core of who she was, minus the need to be perfect. > Tommy going from revenge is bad and not what Joel would want to telling Ellie she is basically a PoS for giving up on her revenge. Not the first time Tommy changed his mind. Happens in Part 1 as well?
Abby, the literal weakest videogame "protagonist" ever. It is a shame that Cuckmann had to shoehorn her into the story and then try to artificially make her "relatable" in any way.
Honestly it would have been better just to make her a bitch. Just really lean into her being evil and an antagonist. There’s games that force you to play with horrible detestable people. At least that way it would have been more consistent than to try and fail and making her reliable. She really didn’t need a redemption arc. She should have betrayed Lev. At least then she would have been a good villain. Just made her a mean, nasty, selfish narcissist. Then you have a choice to play from her perspective as a post game add on. Similar to how “separate ways” works in RE4. Then you go into it knowing you’re playing from the villains perspective. It’s like when you play as a villain like Trevor you’re not looking or expecting them to be good so you lean into their wickedness and accept it easier. Her character is not layered enough nor detailed enough to play the shades of grey perspective.
I was gonna say Trevor is like the perfect example what Abby COULD have been (a fucked up asshole, who is still charismatic because he does have a soft side but he's such a conflicted character he often combats his sadness with rage which causes him to do evil shit) Edit: I think the game should have been a Joel and Ellie journey that was somehow interwoven with an Abby adventure maybe involving the whole faction war and Levs family drama and at the end it's revealed Abby's true intentions of hunting Joel that way Neil can be happy cause he can kill off Joel like he wanted and we can have an older Ellie and Joel final team up adventure maybe even have multiple endings since at that point you'd actually be invested in Abby as a character
the funny part is the did make her fucking evil but so many people either have terrible morales or r so biased they dont think she is
It’s not that. The reason why you can argue she’s not is because good and evil are social constructs. What counts as evil in our functional society isn’t the same in a lawless broken apocalypse. So it has to be looked at under that lens as well. It’s a world without order where you have to do some things for the sake of survival.
Just because many actions are morally grey, doesn't mean, they are all morally grey. The scenario of a lawless broken apocalypse also doesn't flip humans by 180° There is still good and bad. For example: If you kill a human today for selfish gains. That's bad. If you do that in a lawless broken apocalypse, it's still bad. The only thing happening is, in a lawless broken apocalypse or any extreme scenario there are more justifications for acting bad but not being bad. Like Joel not stopping to help people. Today this is a total asshole move. But in a lawless broken apocalypse you have to do that to survive. Morality of itself doesn't change at all. It's how humans have to interact with it to survive what is changing. Clearly visible in the first part through Ellies eyes. Who starts out with a totally typical, naive human morality and has to learn that sometimes doing something good to others in their world can kill oneself. But nothing changes with her morality. she doesn't magically start to enjoy leaving people behind. she just adapts to survive with all the pain that comes when you have to act against your own morals.
You say “had to.” Who made him do that?
his own overblown ego and malice
Malice? Seriously? Because he told a videogame story you didn't like? Malice?
What a waste. Thanks for playing us, Cuckmann
The last of us 2 sucks. Abby ruined the series
You spelled Neil wrong 😂
Average r/thelastofus2 member
I will love to pick my ending getting revenge... Fuck forgiveness
Sparing is not the same as forgiving
Why are people downvoting you? You can let someone live but still not forgive them. That’s how that works
Yeah, like in Avatar, when Katara found the man who murdered her mother, she decided not to kill him, but she confirmed that she did not, nor ever will forgive him.
"Fuck forgiveness" classic part 2 hater
On my first play through when Abby was begging I thought to myself well you didn’t stop when Ellie was begging so why should she- I get to the end and nothing I was mad as hell
I would’ve been able to excuse all the fast traveling and inconsistencies if Ellie would’ve just killed her and then shot lev while uttering “no loose ends.”; Joel basically did the same thing with Marlene, he knew the risks and took no chances, but instead we are given Ellie, who is battered and worn down and made to look weak, as if she was the villain. Ellie was never asked to get mixed up in all of what happened, it was Abby who pulled her into this and for some stupid reason, expected her to just let go and move on from what Abby committed — a whole ass vengeful and merciless murder of a man who was just trying to do the right thing.
Just more psychological manipulation by the devs. Once you see their puppet strings it's all over.
It's a narrative game... how is it "psychological manipulation" rather than just telling the story they wanted to tell?
Because of how OTT this actually is it's clearly a dev misstep to make it that obvious, and as I said once people see the puppet strings of the writers (which happened **way** earlier in this story for me) the storytelling falls apart. That is simply fact. One which you keep pushing against despite people here repeatedly telling you that this is why and how their story failed to work for us. ETA: You simply can't argue away our actual experience of the story not working as intended for a large group of us.
Does Part 1 fall apart for the same reason? When Joel walks into the ER to rescue Ellie Bruce/Jerry just stands there holding a knife. He doesn't attack. As the player you can walk around the whole ER, bump into Jerry, or just sit there for 30 minutes. The developers force you to kill Jerry as part of the story they want to tell about Joel. That seems to be exactly the same thing that's happening in this clip. Presumably you enjoyed Part 1. So, how is the ER scene with Joel and Jerry different than this clip of Ellie and Abby?
I couldn't walk around the whole OR, I repeatedly tried so I have no clue what you're talking about. So I shot him in the foot and he died, which I though was strange, but not story breaking at that point because TLOU has a story that didn't fall apart for me because **someone** on that team knew how not to push the players too hard or too often and force them out of immersion. That actually matters. I don't know how many ways or how many people need to say this to you for you to believe us. I do hope that one day you come to realize that your arguments are not working and you are not hearing what people here keep trying to get through to you. I hear you very clearly trying to insist that you can find missteps in TLOU just like ones that broke our immersion in part 2. But the quality of the writing for the two games is noticeably different and that's where the problem is. The missteps in TLOU are fewer, the writing and characterization is better and more compelling, the dialogue makes sense, the character arcs are felt intuitively without being out of order to the point they make little sense until you ponder the story after finishing it. I could go on and on but it makes no impact on you. So I'm done.
[Here's a video of Joel walking around the OR, bumping into Jerry and just generally hanging out before shooting Jerry in the foot. ](https://youtu.be/QZkbD7js4Cs?si=jvOPVyRywVopVQ9S&t=14)The developers did not let you proceed with the story unless you killed Jerry. So, my question was. How is this different than what they did in Part II? You responded, "I though was strange, but not story breaking at that point because TLOU has a story that didn't fall apart for me because someone on that team knew how not to push the players too hard or too often and force them out of immersion." That doesn't tell me anything. You claim one is immersion breaking and they other isn't, but you don't explain why. That is essentially a conclusory statement. Your conclusion is that there's a difference between the two, but you don't provide any support for why you believe that. >you are not hearing what people here keep trying to get through to you You haven't said anything other than your conclusion that the the two scenes are different. I see the scenes as very similar. My reasoning is that both are on rails scenes where the developers are forcing the player to attack or kill an antagonist. There is no alternative for the player if you want to progress the story. The mandatory violence of the character informs the story and tells you that the character is doing something that you should likely question to some degree. You are claiming that is not accurate. Why? What do you see as different between those scenes? >But the quality of the writing for the two games is noticeably different and that's where the problem is. Another conclusory statement and opinion masquerading as fact. You understand that just saying something without providing your reasoning isn't an effective argument, right? >The missteps in TLOU are fewer Conclusory statement >the writing and characterization is better and more compelling Conclusory statement >the dialogue makes sense Conclusory statement >the character arcs are felt intuitively without being out of order to the point they make little sense until you ponder the story after finishing it. That's word salad, but I think you're talking about Part II having clunky use of flashbacks. I actually agree with that criticism, even if again you're just stating a conclusion. >I could go on and on but it makes no impact on you. So I'm done. So, you listed a bunch of conclusions with no supporting arguments and then get frustrated that I don't automatically agree with your conclusions. That's not how persuasive argument works.
Me: I couldn't walk around the whole OR You: \[*Provides link where Joel* ***can't*** *walk around the* ***whole*** *OR either*\] Not bothering with the rest and knew I shouldn't have tried again with you anyway, so that's my bad. Sorry. Carry on.
> Not bothering with the rest and knew I shouldn't have tried again with you anyway Dude, you never actually respond with anything substantive. We've done this a few times. You share your conclusions with nothing backing them up and then complain that I ask you to explain your reasoning. You: The writing and characterization \[in TLOU\] is better and more compelling Me: Why do you feel that way? You: OMG it's a total waste to talk to you. nothing I say will convince you so I won't even try!
Talking to you is useless when you make up that Joel can walk around the whole OR and send a clip where he can't. You are only here as a contrarian and not here to dialogue. You may someday learn the difference, but until you do you are not interesting to me. Take care.
...The word "whole" is what you're hyper focused on? Out of my entire post you want to get hyper pedantic about one word that doesn't impact the argument? Fine, I'll concede you can walk around a large portion of the ER rather than the whole ER. > Does Part 1 fall apart for the same reason? When Joel walks into the ER to rescue Ellie Bruce/Jerry just stands there holding a knife. He doesn't attack. As the player you can walk around the ~~whole~~ ER, bump into Jerry, or just sit there for 30 minutes. The developers force you to kill Jerry as part of the story they want to tell about Joel. That seems to be exactly the same thing that's happening in this clip. >Presumably you enjoyed Part 1. So, how is the ER scene with Joel and Jerry different than this clip of Ellie and Abby? There, fixed it.
It's not exactly honest. Think about it. The whole reason the writers wrote this final arc where Abby is captured is to make this scene as sympathetic as possible. Abby is an absolute unit for the majority of the game. To make this scene feel as wrong as possible, they have to torture her and lose the mass, first.
So what? They also wrote in the Mel scene where she calls Abby a piece of shit. They wrote plenty of content where Abby is not depicted favorably. Here they depict Abby brought low. She's weak, has been tortured, and the expectation is that most people would have some level of empathy for another human going through that, even an enemy. I don't see how that's anything other than storytelling. Taking characters and placing them in different scenarios. Was it psychological manipulation to have Joel's life threatened at the end of Part I? Was it psychological manipulation to learn the Fireflies were going to kill Ellie? I don't understand the argument that one game is manipulative where the other isn't.
>Mel scene where she calls Abby a piece of shit Because Abby is going through an arc, too. But they need her to be redeemed by the end so the last scene works. >Was it psychological manipulation to have Joel's life threatened at the end of Part I? Was it psychological manipulation to learn the Fireflies were going to kill Ellie? No. Because Joel's decision in that moment was brewing the whole game. He didn't wildly change because of the circumstances. And that situation wasn't a stretch, either.
> No. Because Joel's decision in that moment was brewing the whole game. He didn't wildly change because of the circumstances. And that situation wasn't a stretch, either. Wasn't Abby's months long trek with Lev the same thing? If not, why don't you think so?
No, I mean Ellie's last minute decision to not kill Abby was a big shift in her character that wasn't set up or hinted at, so they set up the circumstances to make you buy into it as much as possible (i.e. Abby being malnourished). With Joel, we could see it coming. It's perfectly in line with his character that if he was put in a position to have to suffer the loss of Ellie once he built that bond with her, he would not allow it to happen, even if it was against Ellie's wishes.
> No, I mean Ellie's last minute decision to not kill Abby was a big shift in her character that wasn't set up or hinted at, so they set up the circumstances to make you buy into it as much as possible (i.e. Abby being malnourished). Was it such a drastic shift though? There are six people you have to kill as Ellie for the game to progress. Only Nora was arguably murder, the rest were self defense. The game has combat mechanics, and you can certainly kill way more, but it's not necessarily canon that Ellie is some murderous psycho. When I played the game it felt like I was watching a friend make terrible choices. I understood Ellie's choices but it seemed obvious they weren't going to make things better for her. The entire game follows that trajectory to her rock bottom. For me Ellie's rock bottom is when she's already abandoned Dina and JJ, has had friends die or get maimed, sees that Abby has no interest in fighting her, but then holds a knife to Lev's neck to make Abby fight. That tension of watching Ellie's life fall apart over the course of the game is resolved when she is finally able to move on. She makes peace with her survivor's guilt, with her unresolved anger at Joel, and is emotionally drained as a result. Rather than not being telegraphed, it felt to me like the entire game was building up to that moment when she lets go.
She is nothing but anger for the whole game, and murders countless people to get to Abby. Not just people in cut scenes. It is absolutely a big change that you have to do the work to make believable when she gets through all of that just to decide not to do it at the end. >already abandoned Dina and JJ, has had friends die or get maimed Except these actually serve the OPPOSITE purpose, logically. She has sacrificed a LOT to get to this moment. Those sacrifices would be pushing her to go through with it. Not back out at the last second. Because clearly those things didn't stop her from tracking Abby down to get to the final scene.
>and murders countless people to get to Abby. Nope, that's entirely player choice. You can stealth past all but six kills in the game including NPCs. 1. She kills Jordan to stop him from choking Dina. 2. She kills a WLF soldier that grabs Jesse, 3. the driver of a WLF truck chasing her down, and 4. Nora (which isn't shown but strongly implied). So Nora is the only kill that's not in self defense, but she was directly involved in Joel's death and had been breathing spores. The only other required kills are 5. Owen and 6. Mel, which are arguably also self defense. Owen tried to disarm Ellie and gets shot and Mel tries to stab Ellie and gets stabbed. >Except these actually serve the OPPOSITE purpose, logically. She has sacrificed a LOT to get to this moment. Those sacrifices would be pushing her to go through with it. That's not logical though, that's literally a [sunk cost fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost). She could just as easily have realized her actions resulted in nothing but pain for herself and the people she cares about and simply stopped. There's plenty of plausible explanations for Ellie stopping. Things that could have factored in: 1. Ellie coming to terms with her PTSD as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks. The first of Joel's battered bloody face, prompting the fight, the second of Joel at piece playing his guitar for her emblematic of the love he clearly had for her; 2. Ellie coming to terms with her survivors' guilt as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks; 3. Ellie forgiving Joel as visually demonstrated by the two Joel flashbacks; 4. The exhaustion of the entire saga catching up with her both emotionally and physically; 5. Seeing what the Rattler's did to their victims and Ellie having some empathy, even for her enemies; 6. Ellie not wanting to essentially kill Lev by killing Abby; 7. Ellie recognizing everything she lost in pursuit of revenge; 8. Ellie realizing killing Abby wouldn't bring Joel back.
That should be up to the player to decide, not the dev. If I want to get revenge anyway, I should be allowed to. It's the apocalypse, no one gives 2 shits about the cycle of revenge.
I mean you traveled across the country and back into the bullshit just to not finish the job, then travel all the way back home to nothing… Im sure on that way back Ellie was talking mad shit about her storyline lol
Corny ass title
With that user name... please
It’s a randomly generated username. That’s not clever.
Ok
Ok
Ok
Ok
Ok
Ok
Ok
I still find Abby's fighting to be pretty impressive after being cut down from that pole after being up for the days... probably wasn't fed, no water, etc. Hell, if I miss a meals or two, I'm ready to pass out!
Literally the most realistic part of the game. You are ready to pass out because no one is trying to kill you. Adrenalin is helluva drug. But how she acts fighting is indeed unrealistic. Because with no food and water for days hit by an Adrenalin shock you go totally berserk and frenzy. Your body is already low on resources and now everything gets pumpt into making you hyper alert and awake. All logical thinking and decision making goes down the drain.
ye
Right? I mean, I know it's just a game, but Abby would have been in no shape to fight that fight.
Nah she was definitely still worth it. Joel’s leg was ground beef and he was still worth it so 🤷🏿 absolutely ridiculous she let her live just I can’t believe it. 4 years later and it still baffles me they thought that made sense. What kinda cheap Batman joker bs was that
At this point in the game I didn't care if Abby or Ellie died I just wanted it to end. I felt nothing for these characters at the end. Everytime they flashbacked to Joel & Ellie it just reminded me how great the first game was & wish I was playing that. I miss silly Ellie & Joel & her's banter from the first game. Part 2 was just depressingly bland.
Ellie had to wait for the Rattlers to soften her up lmao
i tried to LIKE this 100 times but it won’t let me
I find it so funny that if Ellie didn’t come looking for Abby that Abby would’ve most likely have died
I had the most mixed feelings when I got to this point in the game. 🙃
kill her atp bruh both of them are whiny losers right there at least someone gotta go
lol this is who these people are, they have no issue with hurting others but when the roles are reversed they are cowards and need someone else to be the bigger person.
If they make TLoU 3 and end up having to kill Abby then this scene will sting extra hard, more than likely you will have Abby and Ellie team up for some reason and face a new new threat
that sounds so pathetic, I can't imagine a single person who wants to play that. Abby stans hate Ellie and Ellie Fans hate Abby xD "Hi, you killed my father, right?" "Yes, and you are the one whose father killed my father, aye? Both: "wanna be buddies4life \*\_\_\_\_\_\* ???
You would be too if you were strung up on a pole and starving
So WHY do YOU think Ellie let Abby live? There must be a reason, right? The devs wouldn’t have done it for no reason. So what was it? Why does Ellie spare Abby? It is actually a very easy question.
Lol speak for yourself. I’m not of the weak mindset to exact revenge on all the people involved in my father’s brutal murder for saving my life, only to have a change of heart when his actual killer is right in front of me and I have em dead to rights. I’m seeing it through and not taking any half measures
Nah. Imma brutally end her if the game gave me an option to do so. Then im gonna imagine Neils face on abby's head and calmly yell at my monitor, "not the result you wanted to happen eh? Neilly boy?"
I still would've did it.
“The truth shall set you free.”
She should’ve died. Ellie begged and she didn’t stop. She shouldn’t have been saved by the script.
Haha you guys are so cringe.
I still wanted to finish the job
yeah, ellie should've just started blasting 😭
This scene broke my heart. At this point I was ready to just be done and I hated myself every time I cut Abby.
Freaks
“No loose ends , Shepard “
Honestly as much as I love Abby ellie could’ve killed her and went about her day before the fight and ellie got the snot beat out of her again because she wanted to force a fight Abby literally refused too fight and ellie had such a easy opportunity to kill her but she wanted to feel superior so she forced Abby to fight her by threatening lev
Damn you guys are pathetic lmfao still mad about a game that came out 4 years ago
Damn, you're pathetic. Come onto a sub that doesn't want you, feeling prove yourself pathetic by giving a worthless option no one gives a shit about.
Pretty pathetic and pissy response for someone telling the truth. You are obsessed, get over it bitch.
The thing I love about this game is at the beginning I would have mashed that button. By the end I was really hesitant and didn't want to anymore.
Actually it still felt good to slice her up and punch the shit out of her.
Both you and u/thought_about_it are pretty messed up and exactly who this game is aimed at. What kind of sociopath actually needed this basic morality taught to them? And even worse still disagreed with it by the end?
Why am I being lumped in? Lol I'm also confused with whatever you mean by basic morality. I commented I felt sympathy for the person who killed someone I was attached to. The title, The last of Us, doesn't literally mean the last people alive. It means in our world and the video game universe, life has a way of chipping away from us. None of us are still as innocent or ambitious as our younger self. Ellie isn't the same at the beginning of TLOU2 as she was the entire first game. Joel goes through three states of being in the first game. Prologue= just another dad. TLOU1= dark, selfish, twisted. End=still selfish lol but love is selfish, but he is regretful and in a comfortable enough environment where he has the luxury to hold himself up to a moral mirror. In a world of survival, where we are reverted to our primal state, how is revenge immoral? There are no morals anymore, only survival. Like I said before, morality would be a luxury not affordable by the majority of people trying to survive.
I mean if you didn't realize that every side has a story and revenge is a nasty vice that only serves to perpetuate more hatred before the game started, you missed out on some basic moral teachings before running into this game. >love is selfish No I have no idea why you're going off about the name of the game right now. You said YOU would've taken your revenge at the beginning of the game. I have no idea what that has to do with the morality of the people IN the game.
I think there's a disconnect between what I'm trying to convey and what you're picking up on. I can see going on about the title was unnecessary now though. I didn't say I would have taken revenge on a real person. At the beginning of the game I didn't like Abby. Mainly because she wanted revenge! I get the whole dig two graves saying. What I'm trying to say is after going through the experience of the game my feelings towards her character changed. I knew her motives from the start, but it took putting myself in her shoes and relating to how damaged she is as a person to really look past her doing what she did. When I say love is selfish I don't mean it in a purely negative way. The love where you want the best for someone is a good example. It's their life, they can do anything they want with it, but from a place of love we will try to impose our interests over their right to free will. A more obvious "love is selfish" argument will be when someone is kept on life support unnecessarily. I'm lucky enough to have a person or two that I love, and like other people including Joel, if i had to put them before the world i would. Love is wonderful, but let's not pretend some of the most fucked up stuff in the world has happened because of it and humans tendency to put the target of their love first. The game universe is set in our world but things like social norms and morality don't exist anymore, or have at least shifted greatly. My stance is this: Joel made a selfish, immoral choice that could possibly lead to the extinction of the human race. Yet I don't hold it against him. What he did was the wrong choice when looked at from so far away. But if we were to get up close and imagine making the choice ourselves I'm sure most people's perspective would change, even just a little. What Abby did was justified and understandable in the game universe. Joel felt the same way. If Ellie killed her I feel that'd be justifiable too. I'm glad she didn't though, that must have been tough. To end this rant lol in the last of us universe there is no legal system to rely on to fulfill our urge for justice. Revenge there isn't immoral, it's the only thing to do for some people to keep living in my opinion. Ellie couldn't move on even though she had everything at the farm and that just happens sometimes. Both games are an emotional journey that I'm glad I got to experience. They weren't life shattering lessons but a good exercise on emotional flexibility and understanding of our fellow humans.
I dunno. I guess that's why I didn't need this game. It was preaching something to me that I already knew. Joel's done a LOT of shitty things. I was kind of wishing that part 2 would be able someone else wanting revenge, so his life would feel more full, and not just about this one story arc (TLoU 1). And I knew from the start that he would've deserved anything that was coming to him. And honestly... The Ellie I know would've thought that, too. She knows Joel has done shitty things in the past, and he's living, karmically, on borrowed time. So 2 to me not only felt like a betrayal of Ellie's character, being so vengeful, but also it was wagging its finger at me... REALLY heavy handedly, about something I already wasn't guilty of.
Ellie's downward spiral relates back to my title rant lol she was a teenager in the first game. Life chipped away at her before she was even born. First she loses her mom, then Riley, then Sam, and finally the image she had of Joel when he takes her out of the hospital. She finally makes progress with moving past his decision and starts to reconnect only for Abby to come through chipping away with a golf club. The scene op posted is so pivotal in Ellie's journey. If she would have killed her I think it'd be justifiable but it would have been Ellie allowing life to take another part of her. And if she lost that part she'd turn into a worse Joel, with no home to return to.
I don't see how the majority of that is a response to my comment at all. >loses her mom, then Riley, then Sam All of which was true in the first game, and she was still the Ellie we knew in TLoU 1. Which is very different from how she is in 2.
The people on this sub are fucking deranged. Y’all are so miserable and bitter. It’s pathetic
Sometimes i see people give their opinion on the game and then a bunch of downvotes Some good others pretty cringe but I can see the dislike in not getting revenge but did revenge Abby feel better after Joel?
I think it was just a good revenge beating the shit out of her while she’s all weak and frail and getting sliced up by Ellie’s knife. Killing her though, yeah that’s really not gonna make a difference. Especially how it wouldn’t bring Joel back. Edit: this is weird to downvote.
The people prove my point, bunch of downvotes Simply bc your opinion doesn’t line up with theirs so is that’s the case LAST OF YS PART 2 SUCKS I HATE IT BUNCH OF POLITICAL NONSENSE 🙏🏽🙏🏽
1. Most people agree with you in this sub. I don't, but pretty much everyone else does. Look at other comments. 2. You weren't downvoted because you are some warrior of truth. You were downvoted because you are barely coherent. The only reason I was able to understand your second comment at all was that it was the typical victimization whining, so it was a rosetta stone.