Support NeoGAF

[The Mad Draklor]

He won't answer if Joel did the right thing getting her out of that hospital, my guess is he doesn't think so and thus he's fine with Ellie being angry at him in part II.

The drama in part II relies a bit much on characters withholding information from each other, Joel not mentioning how the Firelfies were treating him to Ellie, Abby not saying who she really is, "guess", to Joel, Ellie and Abby not mentioning who they're really avenging to each other etc.

This video is very interesting from a legal point of view even though, yes, the judicial system does not exist in the TLOU universe:



However, whether the legal system exists or not in the TLOU world, Joel's decision to save Ellie was the "more correct" decision since a still-alive Ellie will have the opportunity to give consent. In contrast, an already-dead Ellie will never get the opportunity to do so.

 

[Terenty]

You mean she knew she was going to die way before making it to the hospital?

See, this is what happens when you don't pay attention.

So she didn't know, they never talked about her dying for the vaccine, she even said they would go wherever Joel wanted after they are through with the procedure.

Question: at what point did Joel have to come to the conclusion she wanted to die for the vaccine and therefore let her die?

 

[tassletine]

Ellie's anger towards Joel is misplaced survivor's guilt because she feels her life has come at the expense of humanity plus she doesn't like that he keeps lying to her until he can't anymore.

I like this a lot, as it feels real, but the problem I have with these sorts of 'reading in' explanations is they run contrary to the drama of the story -- which is at a basic soap opera level.
The game feels much more like the authors didn't know what they were doing than any deep dive into the human psyche --Just the fact that I find it unbelievable that someone, let alone two people, would cross a war zone (with allies no less) to get revenge -- means that the authors aren't interested in accurate psychology anyway -- so I don't think they should get a pass with more subtle explanations. It may as well be that she's just a moody teenager!

That's not to say I don't like your idea. I do. I just don't buy that the authors had that in mind.

 

[tassletine]

Angry Joe: They put a pregnant woman to on patrol on the front line!
Other people: I can't believe they did that. That's bad writing.

Reality: She wasn't on patrol. Manny and Abby were asked to go to the FOB to meet up with Issac. Mel (pregnant woman) had an assignment at the FOB as part of her regular rotation. She was only traveling because Manny and wanted her and Abby to talk.

You can also talk to an NPC right after the attacked.

Woman: Heard about your ambush.
Woman: Where'd they hit you?
Abby: Uh, right around here.
Abby: Near the warehouses.
Woman: Shit.
Abby: They keep slipping past our lines.


They expected the route to be secure...

Seems like people are letting others interpret things for them. lol

That doesn't explain why they had her climb rope etc -- virtue signalling is the only real explanation there.
At the very least they could have the characters concentrate on her predicament -- There could have been some excellent drama to be had from showing her being protected in a venerable position -- but no -- she couldn't be seen as weak, at all. And that sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

[tassletine]

Yeah its interesting how consistently some people miss the point of major story beats even when its explained in dialogue.

That said I think the main difference between people who like and dislike the story are that the latter have difficulty with the game's refusal to commit to traditional good vs evil tropes. Joel's death is unforgivable because he was a goodie and the fireflies are baddies! Ellie is "ruined" by the story even though what she is doing is shown to be her thinking that's what Joel would do in her shoes until it eventually breaks her, and as for Abby... hoo boy she's damned even though almost her entire arc is one of redemption.

That's because major story beats are traditionally defined by action not dialogue. Good writers know this.

 

[Terenty]

That doesn't explain why they had her climb rope etc -- virtue signalling is the only real explanation there.
At the very least they could have the characters concentrate on her predicament -- There could have been some excellent drama to be had from showing her being protected in a venerable position -- but no -- she couldn't be seen as weak, at all. And that sticks out like a sore thumb.

Wait for another batch of mental gymnastics to explain everything away.

Something like "you see Abby acknowledged that it was stupid of Mel to go along with them, so its not an oversight" as if it explains why she acts like a fucking action hero and not pregnant one bit.

 

[tassletine]

I just thought of something, although It’s a bit late as the thread is dead anyway.

I always thought it was weird that Ellie got bitten at the end as it didn’t serve the plot In any way — and is deliberately commented on by the prisoners. Why even write and animate that?

But Abby bites Ellie doesn’t she? Gets a load of blood in her mouth.
She’s dead.

 

[DForce]

So she didn't know, they never talked about her dying for the vaccine, she even said they would go wherever Joel wanted after they are through with the procedure.

Question: at what point did Joel have to come to the conclusion she wanted to die for the vaccine and therefore let her die?

She after she figured out why Joel lied to her.

Neil Duckmann also clarifies this.


You guys try so hard with this mental gymnastics.

 

[Terenty]

She after she figured out why Joel lied to her.

Neil Duckmann also clarifies this.


You guys try so hard with this mental gymnastics.

But how could Joel know that she wanted to die for the cure if she never told him?

 

[Clear]

That's because major story beats are traditionally defined by action not dialogue. Good writers know this.

Not true, action is open to interpretation and reinterpretation depending on context. Dialogue supplies that context, especially so when the presentation of the drama takes a specifically subjective, as opposed to omniscient view. Which is the case with TLOU2 as the way the story is told tends to stick with the playable character in the moment, i.e. no cutaways to events where the protagonist is not present.

The latter approach fits the "show don't tell" trope, but in so doing establishes a third-person perspective which distances the viewer from the protagonist's perception. The whole point of TLOU2's presentation is to lock the player into the perspective of the character they are controlling, its a considered, deliberate choice in tune with the sentiments and themes of the story they are telling, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Same deal with using omniscience to subvert and recontextualize events, for instance in Nier's "B" route paythrough additional cut-scenes are introduced showing the perspectives and humanity of the bosses you are about to kill (for the second time). The "action" (the boss fights) remain the same, but now with the weight of knowing the true nature of these "monsters" (from the conclusion of the "A" route) and these added sequences the experience is utterly transformed for the player, yet the protagonist's understanding and motivations remain intact.

Frankly, Yoko Taro's structuring is far more impactful and emotional for the player in my estimation. BUT, I would have to concede that it does nothing to deepen his characterization. In Nier his obliviousness is the tragedy, in TLOU2 the tragedy is its progatonist's growing awareness of the wrongness of their actions, and how they react (or don't) to it.

Hence both approaches are 100% legitimate.

 

[DForce]

But how could Joel know that she wanted to die for the cure if she never told him?

He lied to her for a reason.

It's not working, dude.

 

[Terenty]

He lied to her for a reason.

It's not working, dude.

What was the reason?

 

[DForce]

What was the reason?

For obvious reasons. It's not that hard to figure out.

 

[Terenty]

For obvious reasons. It's not that hard to figure out.

Help me, i'm lost

 

[Oddvintagechap]

3 Abbys catching fish.

 

[tassletine]

Not true, action is open to interpretation and reinterpretation depending on context. Dialogue supplies that context, especially so when the presentation of the drama takes a specifically subjective, as opposed to omniscient view. Which is the case with TLOU2 as the way the story is told tends to stick with the playable character in the moment, i.e. no cutaways to events where the protagonist is not present.

The latter approach fits the "show don't tell" trope, but in so doing establishes a third-person perspective which distances the viewer from the protagonist's perception. The whole point of TLOU2's presentation is to lock the player into the perspective of the character they are controlling, its a considered, deliberate choice in tune with the sentiments and themes of the story they are telling, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Same deal with using omniscience to subvert and recontextualize events, for instance in Nier's "B" route paythrough additional cut-scenes are introduced showing the perspectives and humanity of the bosses you are about to kill (for the second time). The "action" (the boss fights) remain the same, but now with the weight of knowing the true nature of these "monsters" (from the conclusion of the "A" route) and these added sequences the experience is utterly transformed for the player, yet the protagonist's understanding and motivations remain intact.

Frankly, Yoko Taro's structuring is far more impactful and emotional for the player in my estimation. BUT, I would have to concede that it does nothing to deepen his characterization. In Nier his obliviousness is the tragedy, in TLOU2 the tragedy is its progatonist's growing awareness of the wrongness of their actions, and how they react (or don't) to it.

Hence both approaches are 100% legitimate.

That’s mostly true and I get your point, but this is an action adventure game (that’s the context) not a book, so you can’t reasonably expect an audience to understand a major plot point (not a minor one) if you deliver the majority of the plot in a visual manner. By all means do it, but don’t expect, and don’t complain when it doesn’t get the results you wanted.
It’s a visual medium so I stand by that context, If this was a book or a play you would have a point, but if you want something to register, and it is important to the story, you make it clear, because EVEN IF YOU DO there will always be people who miss that anyway.

One of the problems I have with this game Is that the subtext and narrative often get mixed up. Themes become more important than reality at certain points. One moment it’s PTSD, something you really have to have real knowledge of to properly understand, the next it’s pregnant women climbing rope.
So which reality are we living in? Are we supposed to buy into fantasy where I have to pay attention to jarring metaphors, or are we supposed to listen and read every detail so we can believe in this as reality? I have no problem with each, but together I think that‘s a bit of a mess. Doubly so when you factor in the structure of the game jerking you around like it does. It smacks of a writer trying to hide problems.

Personally, given that the characters are so mumbly and ineffectual, I put this down to average writing. I have no problem with characters being ineffectual singularly but to have them act like this across the board isn’t good as it reduces conflict and interest.
The first game, whilst not perfect, had great banter between the leads that it made things interesting. Here we have characters like Jessie (who I thought was acted extremely well) but he still doesn’t actually care about anything — his flip flopping — one minute it’s ”I’m going to take Dina back“ the next second it’s “fuck it, I’m going to leave her alone”.
This is a major decision for both Ellie and Jessie, and it involves such primal feelings that the dialogue comes across as utterly false. I can’t imagine any scenario where this would realistically happen If you actually cared about someone, but to have two characters do this is ridiculous — And you could have created church drama from that moment — but instead it’s just ‘let’s go this way‘ ‘okay’ Forget about Dina.

And it’s these sorts of narrative missteps I’m talking about. One‘s where the action bumps up against theme. I get that this is primarily a story written for young women but I think displaying them as tough at all cost does the story a massive disservice and reeks of propaganda, and frankly given that, I don’t actually understand why you would portray women like that. Telling people that pregnant women don’t need help or you should abandon them if they are sick is bizarre if it’s propaganda, and unrealistic if it’s drama. It smacks of indecision.

 

[joe_zazen]

3 Abbys catching fish.

at first i was like but that was actually pretty fun to watch. And aside from a bit of acromegaly face, they are pretty hot.

 

[DForce]

Personally, given that the characters are so mumbly and ineffectual, I put this down to average writing. I have no problem with characters being ineffectual singularly but to have them act like this across the board isn’t good as it reduces conflict and interest.
The first game, whilst not perfect, had great banter between the leads that it made things interesting. Here we have characters like Jessie (who I thought was acted extremely well) but he still doesn’t actually care about anything — his flip flopping — one minute it’s ”I’m going to take Dina back“ the next second it’s “fuck it, I’m going to leave her alone”.
This is a major decision for both Ellie and Jessie, and it involves such primal feelings that the dialogue comes across as utterly false. I can’t imagine any scenario where this would realistically happen If you actually cared about someone, but to have two characters do this is ridiculous — And you could have created church drama from that moment — but instead it’s just ‘let’s go this way‘ ‘okay’ Forget about Dina.

Did you even play the game?

Jesse wants to take Dina back to Jackson because she needs proper care. What you're forgetting is that they don't want to leave Tommy behind. Jesse and Ellie leave to find Tommy.

Jesse reiterates this during Seattle Day 3, which does not take place during a cutscene.

Jesse: I need to get clear on something.
Jesse: When we find Tommy, you're good with going home?
Ellie: Yeah
Jesse: You'll be leaving some of these assholes alive.
Ellie: Dina should be back in Jackson
Jesse: Okay. Good.

They later hear reports about how a sniper is in the area, who happens to be Tommy. Jesse wants to go in the direction to find Tommy while Ellie still wants to go after Abby. Every returns to the theater later and they're all set to go back to Jackson until Abby shows up and kills Jesse.

Jesse never flip-flopped. He wanted to go back to Jackson, but he didn't want to leave before finding Tommy first.

 

[Terenty]

EDMIX, could you maybe tell me why Joel lied to Ellie in the first game? We established that he didn't know about Ellie's desire to die for the vaccine before saving her from the operation.

What was the reason for lying then?

 

[Ulysses 31]

EDMIX, could you maybe tell me why Joel lied to Ellie in the first game? We established that he didn't know about Ellie's desire to die for the vaccine before saving her from the operation.

What was the reason for lying then?

Why does Joel even need to lie at that point? Just telling Ellie what the Fireflies did and how they were likely to get him killed would've probably gotten Ellie to be less cooperative with them if she had a choice.

 

[Terenty]

Why does Joel even need to lie at that point? Just telling Ellie what the Fireflies did and how they were likely to get him killed would've probably gotten Ellie to be less cooperative with them if she had a choice.

I can kinda see why he would lie to her at that moment so she wouldn't run off and do something reckless. For her own safety, not because he thought he made a mistake by saving her life and now have to lie

 

[Ulysses 31]

I can kinda see why he would lie to her at that moment so she wouldn't run off and do something reckless. For her own safety, not because he thought he made a mistake by saving her life and now have to lie

I can too that he doesn't want to hit her with the truth right after she wakes up but the 2nd time he shouldn't have with all the facts on his side.

 

[tassletine]

Did you even play the game?

Jesse wants to take Dina back to Jackson because she needs proper care. What you're forgetting is that they don't want to leave Tommy behind. Jesse and Ellie leave to find Tommy.

Jesse reiterates this during Seattle Day 3, which does not take place during a cutscene.



They later hear reports about how a sniper is in the area, who happens to be Tommy. Jesse wants to go in the direction to find Tommy while Ellie still wants to go after Abby. Every returns to the theater later and they're all set to go back to Jackson until Abby shows up and kills Jesse.

Jesse never flip-flopped. He wanted to go back to Jackson, but he didn't want to leave before finding Tommy first.

I am completely aware of what happened but stating what Jessie does plotwise only highlights the flaws in the story.
Leaving an sick and pregnant woman to go after a guy that is on the exact same mission as the main character, sticks out as being contrived.

I doubt anyone would do that, unless they really hated their lover -- even then it's a bit of a stretch. In all the relationships I've been in, if one party abandons the other in a time of stress, the relationship is is almost always over. It's a signal that the person just does not give a shit on a deep level.

But here we have two characters who supposedly loved that person do the exact same thing, with barely any discussion about it.
"She's pregnant" Ellie cries, as Abby is about to slit her throat. At that point I was thinking "Well you pretty much left her to die, what do you care?".
That lack of care Ellie displays towards Dina runs contrary to the plot which tells you that they are in love. Actions make the man (or woman here) as they say.

The flip flopping is seen clearly here in the below Youtube clip. The actors do an excellent job of trying to sell this, but the only explanation that is really given are that Dina has given orders for them to leave. This is also odd as the previous lines of dialogue are Jessie agreeing with Ellie that they need to take her back.

Ellie's explanation -- "I can't just leave Tommy, He's out here because of me"
-- YES but Dina is also, and she's sick and pregnant.?
That doesn't make logical sense. It makes sense in that Ellie is a driven, uncaring little bitch -- But there's no objection or questioning from Jessie here, just blind obedience -- and that is contrived given the circumstances and his relationship with Dina.

*

E -"Maybe you could take her back?"
J - "She's not going to leave without you"

Then ... Just after ...

J Screw it
E Are you good with leaving Dina by herself?
J Her orders.

So Dina basically has "ordered" Jessie to leave with Ellie, presumably not just screaming "go away!" when she was "throwing up all night".
And Jessie, rather than taking that as just the ramblings of a sick person with a fever, decides that she was acting in a sound mind as is now just fucking off because she said so.

Then when they tell Dina that they are going, she seems to already know and accept this, even though she hasn't been told. Then they leave.
You would at the very least make sure that Dina was in a stable condition.

This all smacks of a writers room filled with people who either don't have children, or are just spitballing ideas without really thinking about the characters.
*

 

[Terenty]

I am completely aware of what happened but stating what Jessie does plotwise only highlights the flaws in the story.
Leaving an sick and pregnant woman to go after a guy that is on the exact same mission as the main character, sticks out as being contrived.

I doubt anyone would do that, unless they really hated their lover -- even then it's a bit of a stretch. In all the relationships I've been in, if one party abandons the other in a time of stress, the relationship is is almost always over. It's a signal that the person just does not give a shit on a deep level.

But here we have two characters who supposedly loved that person do the exact same thing, with barely any discussion about it.
"She's pregnant" Ellie cries, as Abby is about to slit her throat. At that point I was thinking "Well you pretty much left her to die, what do you care?".
That lack of care Ellie displays towards Dina runs contrary to the plot which tells you that they are in love. Actions make the man (or woman here) as they say.

The flip flopping is seen clearly here in the below Youtube clip. The actors do an excellent job of trying to sell this, but the only explanation that is really given are that Dina has given orders for them to leave. This is also odd as the previous lines of dialogue are Jessie agreeing with Ellie that they need to take her back.

Ellie's explanation -- "I can't just leave Tommy, He's out here because of me"
-- YES but Dina is also, and she's sick and pregnant.?
That doesn't make logical sense. It makes sense in that Ellie is a driven, uncaring little bitch -- But there's no objection or questioning from Jessie here, just blind obedience -- and that is contrived given the circumstances and his relationship with Dina.

*

E -"Maybe you could take her back?"
J - "She's not going to leave without you"

Then ... Just after ...

J Screw it
E Are you good with leaving Dina by herself?
J Her orders.

So Dina basically has "ordered" Jessie to leave with Ellie, presumably not just screaming "go away!" when she was "throwing up all night".
And Jessie, rather than taking that as just the ramblings of a sick person with a fever, decides that she was acting in a sound mind as is now just fucking off because she said so.

Then when they tell Dina that they are going, she seems to already know and accept this, even though she hasn't been told. Then they leave.
You would at the very least make sure that Dina was in a stable condition.

This all smacks of a writers room filled with people who either don't have children, or are just spitballing ideas without really thinking about the characters.
*

Yeah, instead of Ellie going "i will talk her into going home with you, dont worry", they go screw it, let's leave her here in the middle of nowhere all alone. Some 4d chess Druckmann playing here i tell you.

 

[DForce]

I am completely aware of what happened but stating what Jessie does plotwise only highlights the flaws in the story.
Leaving an sick and pregnant woman to go after a guy that is on the exact same mission as the main character, sticks out as being contrived.

I doubt anyone would do that, unless they really hated their lover -- even then it's a bit of a stretch. In all the relationships I've been in, if one party abandons the other in a time of stress, the relationship is is almost always over. It's a signal that the person just does not give a shit on a deep level.

But here we have two characters who supposedly loved that person do the exact same thing, with barely any discussion about it.
"She's pregnant" Ellie cries, as Abby is about to slit her throat. At that point I was thinking "Well you pretty much left her to die, what do you care?".
That lack of care Ellie displays towards Dina runs contrary to the plot which tells you that they are in love. Actions make the man (or woman here) as they say.

The flip flopping is seen clearly here in the below Youtube clip. The actors do an excellent job of trying to sell this, but the only explanation that is really given are that Dina has given orders for them to leave. This is also odd as the previous lines of dialogue are Jessie agreeing with Ellie that they need to take her back.

Ellie's explanation -- "I can't just leave Tommy, He's out here because of me"
-- YES but Dina is also, and she's sick and pregnant.?
That doesn't make logical sense. It makes sense in that Ellie is a driven, uncaring little bitch -- But there's no objection or questioning from Jessie here, just blind obedience -- and that is contrived given the circumstances and his relationship with Dina.

*

E -"Maybe you could take her back?"
J - "She's not going to leave without you"

Then ... Just after ...

J Screw it
E Are you good with leaving Dina by herself?
J Her orders.

So Dina basically has "ordered" Jessie to leave with Ellie, presumably not just screaming "go away!" when she was "throwing up all night".
And Jessie, rather than taking that as just the ramblings of a sick person with a fever, decides that she was acting in a sound mind as is now just fucking off because she said so.

Then when they tell Dina that they are going, she seems to already know and accept this, even though she hasn't been told. Then they leave.
You would at the very least make sure that Dina was in a stable condition.

This all smacks of a writers room filled with people who either don't have children, or are just spitballing ideas without really thinking about the characters.
*

You guys try so hard to find "bad writing" and 99% of the time, you guys just completely fail at it. lol

Jesse only says "screw it" he decided to go with Ellie to find Tommy instead of staying at the theatre. The main narrative of this sequence hasn't changed: They want to go back to Jackson to give Dina proper care.

What Jesse is upset about is that Dina is not telling him that she's pregnant. Even though he cares for Dina, it's very understandable that he would be upset with her at that moment, but that doesn't mean he doesn't care for her.

So Dina basically has "ordered" Jessie to leave with Ellie, presumably not just screaming "go away!" when she was "throwing up all night".
And Jessie, rather than taking that as just the ramblings of a sick person with a fever, decides that she was acting in a sound mind as is now just fucking off because she said so.

Then when they tell Dina that they are going, she seems to already know and accept this, even though she hasn't been told. Then they leave.
You would at the very least make sure that Dina was in a stable condition.

That's not what's portrayed in the story.

Jesse stayed up with her all night and he knows what condition she's in and that she's not going to get better unless they go back to Jackson.

You guys try way too hard and just end up failing. This wouldn't be a problem if you just focused on the story.

That doesn't make logical sense. It makes sense in that Ellie is a driven, uncaring little bitch -- But there's no objection or questioning from Jessie here, just blind obedience -- and that is contrived given the circumstances and his relationship with Dina.

Jessee doesn't object because he knows bringing back Tommy is also important. This isn't some 3 hour car ride back to Jackson, traveling back to Jackson would take weeks. The logical choice Jesse is making is finding Tommy and then going back to Jackson. If they leave without Tommy, then the narrative would be that they didn't care about Tommy. Bringing back Tommy while leaving Abby means they care back making sure they make it back home safely.

 

[tassletine]

You guys try so hard to find "bad writing" and 99% of the time, you guys just completely fail at it. lol

Jesse only says "screw it" he decided to go with Ellie to find Tommy instead of staying at the theatre. The main narrative of this sequence hasn't changed: They want to go back to Jackson to give Dina proper care.

What Jesse is upset about is that Dina is not telling him that she's pregnant. Even though he cares for Dina, it's very understandable that he would be upset with her at that moment, but that doesn't mean he doesn't care for her.




That's not what's portrayed in the story.

Jesse stayed up with her all night and he knows what condition she's in and that she's not going to get better unless they go back to Jackson.

You guys try way too hard and just end up failing. This wouldn't be a problem if you just focused on the story.





Jessee doesn't object because he knows bringing back Tommy is also important. This isn't some 3 hour car ride back to Jackson, traveling back to Jackson would take weeks. The logical choice Jesse is making is finding Tommy and then going back to Jackson. If they leave without Tommy, then the narrative would be that they didn't care about Tommy. Bringing back Tommy while leaving Abby means they care back making sure they make it back home safely.

You‘re just trying to bait me without addressing the core motivations that I brought up. Basic human behaviour Vs Themes that the game is trying to push — that results in clunky writing in parts.

I stand by what I’ve written for the most part. If something takes you out of the story it takes you out. If the story isn’t clear and the plot points solid I question why? When I find a lady climbing rope then it’s clear there Is an agenda. It’s also clear because Druckman has said as much. And when you slip your own personal politics into something that isn’t directly political (or pretending not to be) it becomes propaganda. Not good propaganda mind, because the characters aren’t strong enough and the message is muddled. But this has always been the case, and people have always criticised this sort of writing.

The distance thing is a good point, and something that I never thought of as I don’t live in the US. I just took the “day 3” titles at face value. That it was the third day of their journey. Again, I would say that is poor writing,, as It wasn’t clear. Again, if you want to write that sort of thing, feel free, but don’t expect people to thoroughly enjoy what you’ve written.

Tommy is a Lone wolf and a side character in this. Not part of the main troop. We wouldn’t miss him as much if he died.

I think you and I just see good and bad as different things. I see good storytelling as being concise and as simple as possible. Kind of like the first game. You seem to see it as being layered and poetic.
Personally I think this game doesn't have BAD writing as you seem to think, I think, just average soap opera stuff. I liked the game very much overall but that enjoyment has lessened the more I think about it.

It also, Is by my own admission a horror game, and horror tropes pretty much demand that characters do stupid things as they are a moral lesson as to not what to do — So I may be criticising this from the wrong angle. But they are definitely acting stupidly and unrealistically..
Having said that. I was still bored (at points) and think that all the characters are written with an extremely similar tone (SERIOUS and WHISPERING = a serious work of art) which is something that feels forced and more the sort of thing a teenager thinks is mature.
I’ve been to a war zone and people just don’t act like that so it doesn’t ring true to me. Something like Full Metal Jacket does ring true in contrast.

 

[DForce]

You‘re just trying to bait me without addressing the core motivations that I brought up. Basic human behaviour Vs Themes that the game is trying to push — that results in clunky writing in parts.

I stand by what I’ve written for the most part. If something takes you out of the story it takes you out. If the story isn’t clear and the plot points solid I question why? When I find a lady climbing rope then it’s clear there Is an agenda. It’s also clear because Druckman has said as much. And when you slip your own personal politics into something that isn’t directly political (or pretending not to be) it becomes propaganda. Not good propaganda mind, because the characters aren’t strong enough and the message is muddled. But this has always been the case, and people have always criticised this sort of writing.

The distance thing is a good point, and something that I never thought of as I don’t live in the US. I just took the “day 3” titles at face value. That it was the third day of their journey. Again, I would say that is poor writing,, as It wasn’t clear. Again, if you want to write that sort of thing, feel free, but don’t expect people to thoroughly enjoy what you’ve written.

Tommy is a Lone wolf and a side character in this. Not part of the main troop. We wouldn’t miss him as much if he died.

I think you and I just see good and bad as different things. I see good storytelling as being concise and as simple as possible. Kind of like the first game. You seem to see it as being layered and poetic.
Personally I think this game doesn't have BAD writing as you seem to think, I think, just average soap opera stuff. I liked the game very much overall but that enjoyment has lessened the more I think about it.

It also, Is by my own admission a horror game, and horror tropes pretty much demand that characters do stupid things as they are a moral lesson as to not what to do — So I may be criticising this from the wrong angle. But they are definitely acting stupidly and unrealistically..
Having said that. I was still bored (at points) and think that all the characters are written with an extremely similar tone (SERIOUS and WHISPERING = a serious work of art) which is something that feels forced and more the sort of thing a teenager thinks is mature.
I’ve been to a war zone and people just don’t act like that so it doesn’t ring true to me. Something like Full Metal Jacket does ring true in contrast.

There's no baiting, i'm sticking to the narrative of the game, you're trying to go in a different direction by trying to change it. What you have said thus fat doesn't fall in line with the plot.

I've seen the usual people in here nitpick about the story, and I always laugh when they fail to actually understand what's going on.

It's kinda like people screaming "PLOT HOLES" in the TLOU part II when they don't even know what plot holes are and they completely miss what's going on in the story.

 

[tassletine]

Yeah, instead of Ellie going "i will talk her into going home with you, dont worry", they go screw it, let's leave her here in the middle of nowhere all alone. Some 4d chess Druckmann playing here i tell you.

HA! 4d chess! Exactly! You can feel the writers desperately trying to cram it in. If we say it fast enough and get good actors I think we can pull this one off.

The problem is Druckman seems to always want to put himself in a difficult situation as a writer and try and pull it off, but this just created a downward spiral with no real endIng.
He also seems to be delierately trying to avoid tropes — which becomes a trope in it’s self. Tropes exist because they are based on human behaviour, and in avoiding them, he’s just created some pretty bland characters.

 

[tassletine]

There's no baiting, i'm sticking to the narrative of the game, you're trying to go in a different direction by trying to change it. What you have said thus fat doesn't fall in line with the plot.

I've seen the usual people in here nitpick about the story, and I always laugh when they fail to actually understand what's going on.

It's kinda like people screaming "PLOT HOLES" in the TLOU part II when they don't even know what plot holes are and they completely miss what's going on in the story.

Yeah you do. All that LOL, “you guys stuff is very transparent — Usual people, Always laugh. Etc. High minded, looking down on The person you’re replying to nonsense.
If the only thing you can do is criticise the person speaking then there’s nothing more to say. Have a good day.

 

[tfur]

I am completely aware of what happened but stating what Jessie does plotwise only highlights the flaws in the story.
Leaving an sick and pregnant woman to go after a guy that is on the exact same mission as the main character, sticks out as being contrived.

I doubt anyone would do that, unless they really hated their lover -- even then it's a bit of a stretch. In all the relationships I've been in, if one party abandons the other in a time of stress, the relationship is is almost always over. It's a signal that the person just does not give a shit on a deep level.

But here we have two characters who supposedly loved that person do the exact same thing, with barely any discussion about it.
"She's pregnant" Ellie cries, as Abby is about to slit her throat. At that point I was thinking "Well you pretty much left her to die, what do you care?".
That lack of care Ellie displays towards Dina runs contrary to the plot which tells you that they are in love. Actions make the man (or woman here) as they say.

The flip flopping is seen clearly here in the below Youtube clip. The actors do an excellent job of trying to sell this, but the only explanation that is really given are that Dina has given orders for them to leave. This is also odd as the previous lines of dialogue are Jessie agreeing with Ellie that they need to take her back.

Ellie's explanation -- "I can't just leave Tommy, He's out here because of me"
-- YES but Dina is also, and she's sick and pregnant.?
That doesn't make logical sense. It makes sense in that Ellie is a driven, uncaring little bitch -- But there's no objection or questioning from Jessie here, just blind obedience -- and that is contrived given the circumstances and his relationship with Dina.

*

E -"Maybe you could take her back?"
J - "She's not going to leave without you"

Then ... Just after ...

J Screw it
E Are you good with leaving Dina by herself?
J Her orders.

So Dina basically has "ordered" Jessie to leave with Ellie, presumably not just screaming "go away!" when she was "throwing up all night".
And Jessie, rather than taking that as just the ramblings of a sick person with a fever, decides that she was acting in a sound mind as is now just fucking off because she said so.

Then when they tell Dina that they are going, she seems to already know and accept this, even though she hasn't been told. Then they leave.
You would at the very least make sure that Dina was in a stable condition.

This all smacks of a writers room filled with people who either don't have children, or are just spitballing ideas without really thinking about the characters.
*

This all smacks of a writers room filled with people who either don't have children, or are just spitballing ideas without really thinking about the characters.

Thank you.

My thoughts exactly:
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/all-...-nowhere-else.1538175/page-126#post-258890667

My second play through had me feeling the story is even worse than I first thought.


Side note:

Anyone notice, there is a scene where Tommy said he found some special jewelry for his wife? Then Jesse says: "tell her it's from all of us." Those lines and that scene made me really feel that they swapped out Joel with Jesse (besides the actual swap they made from what was in the trailer!), and kept the writing. Like who the fuck is Jesse in the Joel, Ellie, Tommy and his wife Maria's relationship to even say that?

Little things, but so many hamfisted moments. I don't really care what the apologists say about the story, it is an incredible let down for fans of the first game.

 

[DForce]

Yeah you do. All that LOL, “you guys stuff is very transparent — Usual people, Always laugh. Etc. High minded, looking down on The person you’re replying to nonsense.
If the only thing you can do is criticise the person speaking then there’s nothing more to say. Have a good day.

I laugh because it's amazes me how people can misinterpret the story.

 

[tassletine]

Thank you.

My thoughts exactly:
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/all-...-nowhere-else.1538175/page-126#post-258890667

My second play through had me feeling the story is even worse than I first thought.


Side note:

Anyone notice, there is a scene where Tommy said he found some special jewelry for his wife? Then Jesse says: "tell her it's from all of us." Those lines and that scene made me really feel that they swapped out Joel with Jesse (besides the actual swap they made from what was in the trailer!), and kept the writing. Like who the fuck is Jesse in the Joel, Ellie, Tommy and his wife Maria's relationship to even say that?

Little things, but so many hamfisted moments. I don't really care what the apologists say about the story, it is an incredible let down for fans of the first game.

Thanks for the link.

I can't tell you how succinctly your post captures my thoughts on the game. Down to enjoying the gameplay massively (which is definitely something that doesn't get enough credit).

I don't have children but even I can see there is a massive mis-step in the story there. The whole thing comes across like a psychopath trying desperately to show that they have feelings.
It's the constant use of guilt and pity as a manipulative plot device that makes me feel this way. It literally feels like the writers have some sort of mental disorder.

I don't put this solely down to Druckman as there was a great deal of heart in the first game -- I think it probably more to do with ND living in a woke bubble, as guilt/pity is always used in those circles to manipulate people.

*

That's an interesting take on Jessie Joel switch. I think you could be right, as the story would make a bit more sense if Joel was killed in the middle.
This would make his (Jessie) decision to go with Ellie and leave Dina behind more believable, as he wants to get Tommy but also protect Ellie.
You would then have to wait an eternity to see Ellie again, but realise that all that time she had been grieving Joel, not grieving from the beginning of the game.

I think for this to work though you would have to swap out Joel's initial death for Tommy -- And Tommy's character with Jessie's. Ie. In the scene where they decide to leave Dina, they would be going to find Jessie to tell him he has a child.

So. Tommy gets killed.
Joel sets out for revenge. Ellie and Dina follow.
All the while as Ellie searches for Joel, she is becoming more and more dehumanised and realises that following him on his sick mission for revenge is tearing her apart.
Abby kills Joel.
Abby's section.
Then as usual.

That's all just a daft thought experiment obviously and I haven't put much effort in, but I don't think that's beyond the realms of possibility as I'm mostly just swapping out the skins of the characters -- And knowing how much ND playtest and screw around (by their own admission) with the narrative, it could be vaguely plausible.

 

[room414]

EDMIX, could you maybe tell me why Joel lied to Ellie in the first game? We established that he didn't know about Ellie's desire to die for the vaccine before saving her from the operation.

What was the reason for lying then?

His reason for lying is because he knew she would have died for the vaccine. Dude, just stop. You don't even have a basic understanding of the story.

 

[tassletine]

I laugh because it's amazes me how people can misinterpret the story.

You just can't get off that high horse can you?
-- So it's MY fault you act like that? I get it.

You laugh because you're antisocial. Don't blame others for your own behaviour.

 

[Ulysses 31]

His reason for lying is because he knew she would have died for the vaccine. Dude, just stop. You don't even have a basic understanding of the story.

No, that's someone with a very vested interest telling Joel that she would want to die for a cure. It also reveals that no one at the Fireflies bothered to asked Ellie. Ellie made future plans with Joel for afterwards which seems out of character for someone ready to die at that hospital.

 

[room414]

No, that's someone with a very vested interest telling Joel that she would want to die for a cure. It also reveals that no one at the Fireflies bothered to asked Ellie. Ellie made future plans with Joel for afterwards which seems out of character for someone ready to die at that hospital.

She made future plans because obviously she didn't know she was going to have to die for the vaccine. The vid makes it quite clear that Joel knew she would die for it if she had to, though.

I was reluctant to get involved in this thread because it's like arguing with flat earthers. You have no idea what you're talking about and you can't be reasoned with.

 

[Ulysses 31]

She made future plans because obviously she didn't know she was going to have to die for the vaccine. The vid makes it quite clear that Joel knew she would die for it if she had to, though.

I was reluctant to get involved in this thread because it's like arguing with flat earthers. You have no idea what you're talking about and you can't be reasoned with.

So Ellie and Joel didn't expect Ellie to have to die for a vaccine, so where should it have been clear to Joel that she would be willing to die before any shots were fired at that hospital? Ellie never mentions it to him, Marlene/Fireflies don't show any communiques that Ellie would do anything for a cure. Also at the point in the video, the Fireflies were shooting at him and Ellie.

And lest we forget, the Fireflies were escorting him out at gunpoint without promised pay or his gear in Salt Lake City which would put him in grave danger.

 

[Yselacrey00]

That doesn't explain why they had her climb rope etc -- virtue signalling is the only real explanation there.
At the very least they could have the characters concentrate on her predicament -- There could have been some excellent drama to be had from showing her being protected in a venerable position -- but no -- she couldn't be seen as weak, at all. And that sticks out like a sore thumb.

Lol what? The game showed her as weak because she was pregnant. They showed a weak pregnant women who didn't want to accept she was weak.

 

[Yselacrey00]

So Ellie and Joel didn't expect Ellie to have to die for a vaccine, so where should it have been clear to Joel that she would be willing to die before any shots were fired at that hospital? Ellie never mentions it to him, Marlene/Fireflies don't show any communiques that Ellie would do anything for a cure. Also at the point in the video, the Fireflies were shooting at him and Ellie.

And lest we forget, the Fireflies were escorting him out at gunpoint without promised pay or his gear in Salt Lake City which would put him in grave danger.

I played the last of us several times, and the way ellie talks you can feel she would die if that's what is needed. Also you can feel there's no way Joel is going to loose what's basically his second chance to be a father. His daughter died z no fucking way in hell he was gonna let Ellie die, a girl he loves just as if she was his.

 

[Bragr]

I played the last of us several times, and the way ellie talks you can feel she would die if that's what is needed. Also you can feel there's no way Joel is going to loose what's basically his second chance to be a father. His daughter died z no fucking way in hell he was gonna let Ellie die, a girl he loves just as if she was his.

And thats the reason why Joel is evil, setting his own desires over everyone else. Its what makes the end of the first better than anything in the second game, showing the wickedness of mankind through the lens of a playable character we love, best turn of story Naughty Dog ever did.

 

[Yselacrey00]

And thats the reason why Joel is evil, setting his own desires over everyone else. Its what makes the end of the first better than anything in the second game, showing the wickedness of mankind through the lens of a playable character we love, best turn of story Naughty Dog ever did.

I don't think it was a turn. We kinda knew something like that was going to happen, is not the first time it does. I hate ND killing Joel, I wouldn't have gone that way because I loved their relationship. But if that's the way they wanted to go, I think they did it amazingly.

 

[Bragr]

I don't think it was a turn. We kinda knew something like that was going to happen, is not the first time it does. I hate ND killing Joel, I wouldn't have gone that way because I loved their relationship. But if that's the way they wanted to go, I think they did it amazingly.

It was the right thing to do BECAUSE you loved their relationship, and because there needed to be consequenses for the first game, or else its all for show. I think the problem with Joel in the second game was not his fate, but that he felt like a side character rather than the beloved figure he was in the first, he didnt come off as the capable man of action but instead like a ploy early in the game.

 

[Ulysses 31]

I played the last of us several times, and the way ellie talks you can feel she would die if that's what is needed. Also you can feel there's no way Joel is going to loose what's basically his second chance to be a father. His daughter died z no fucking way in hell he was gonna let Ellie die, a girl he loves just as if she was his.

I can buy that Ellie was willing to die for the cure but not under the conditions presented in the game. Was Ellie really willing to leave Joel at the drop of a hat, after bonding with him throughout the whole journey? What does that say about Ellie? She gets someone who lost a dear daughter to see her as a new daughter while all the time she's prepared to leave without ever saying goodbye? I seriously doubt the the writers intended Ellie to have this cruel character streak in her. It could also make Ellie look like the selfish one who was using Joel all this time.

Working with what happened in the game, Joel was given hope by Ellie for a future with her and was never outright told that Ellie was prepared to die without ever saying goodbye. There's reasonable doubt in Joel's mind that Ellie would've wanted this and so in my eyes he is justified in trying to get her back. Even if he ultimately didn't care for the cure or what Ellie would've wanted, he ended up doing the right thing regardless if his motivations were "pure" or not.

 

[Yselacrey00]

I can buy that Ellie was willing to die for the cure but not under the conditions presented in the game. Was Ellie really willing to leave Joel at the drop of a hat, after bonding with him throughout the whole journey? What does that say about Ellie? She gets someone who lost a dear daughter to see her as a new daughter while all the time she's prepared to leave without ever saying goodbye? I seriously doubt the the writers intended Ellie to have this cruel character streak in her. It could also make Ellie look like the selfish one who was using Joel all this time.

Working with what happened in the game, Joel was given hope by Ellie for a future with her and was never outright told that Ellie was prepared to die without ever saying goodbye. There's reasonable doubt in Joel's mind that Ellie would've wanted this and so in my eyes he is justified in trying to get her back. Even if he ultimately didn't care for the cure or what Ellie would've wanted, he ended up doing the right thing regardless if his motivations were "pure" or not.

Of course. Nobody is saying that Ellie is in the right. She just feels guilty because she gets to live and everybody else to die. She had no say in it and she blames Joel when in fact she should blame the fireflies. Though just remember how excited she was to help the fireflies to develop a vaccine, all they went through to get ellie to that hospital, all the sacrifices they made for nothing. The thing is Joel wasn't giving a say either, Abby's father specifically said they shouldn't say anything to him. Ellie finally realizes that maybe Joel wasn't wrong, she finally tries to understand him. And the moment they are about to reconcile, Joel's taken away from her.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Of course. Nobody is saying that Ellie is in the right. She just feels guilty because she gets to live and everybody else to die. She had no say in it and she blames Joel when in fact she should blame the fireflies. Though just remember how excited she was to help the fireflies to develop a vaccine, all they went through to get ellie to that hospital, all the sacrifices they made for nothing. The thing is Joel wasn't giving a say either, Abby's father specifically said they shouldn't say anything to him. Ellie finally realizes that maybe Joel wasn't wrong, she finally tries to understand him. And the moment they are about to reconcile, Joel's taken away from her.

This is where I have some issues with the writing, Joel never gives the context under which he turned on the Fireflies, completely letting them off the hook and making himself look like the bad guy when Ellie confronts him in part II. Part I also makes it worse by having Joel lie, suggesting that he thinks what he did was wrong while I'm sure any rational person with all the facts would conclude he wasn't.

Not saying the end of part I was ruined, just that it fell apart a little for me.

 

[VulcanRaven]

I just finished the game. It was very good and maybe even better than the first game. I didn't like that they killed Joel at first but the story was good. I liked playing as Abby too. I didn't really like her at first because of what she did but it was interesting to see the other side of the story. She was a great character. I'm not sure if I liked the ending and the game was maybe a bit too long. I would have been ok if it had ended before the Santa Barbara section.

 

[Yselacrey00]

This is where I have some issues with the writing, Joel never gives the context under which he turned on the Fireflies, completely letting them off the hook and making himself look like the bad guy when Ellie confronts him in part II. Part I also makes it worse by having Joel lie, suggesting that he thinks what he did was wrong while I'm sure any rational person with all the facts would conclude he wasn't.

Not saying the end of part I was ruined, just that it fell apart a little for me.

He lied because he knew Ellie would hate him.

 

[Ulysses 31]

He lied because he knew Ellie would hate him.

So she would've approved being killed without knowing and without getting a chance to say goodbye to Joel?
She would've approved that Joel's being marched out without his gear into a dangerous Salt Lake City?

 

[Yselacrey00]

So she would've approved being killed without knowing and without getting a chance to say goodbye to Joel?
She would've approved that Joel's being marched out without his gear into a dangerous Salt Lake City?

Obviously not, but people don't act rational all the time. He lied because if he would have told the truth, ellie would have hated him because he made the decision for her. She thought she was destined to help humanity and Joel took that away from her. Obviously Joel didn't have a chance to decide either, he wasn't given a choice so he made what any decent person would have done. Maybe if he would have told Ellie what happened since the begining, Ellie would have understood Joel. But lying all the time about it, making Ellie think she served not purpose made things a lot worse. And understand Joel, he was afraid of losing her so he took no chance and decided to lie. Let's take things into perspective here, Joel killed the only person capable of saving the world, curing all these people because he didn't want to loose a child he loves. Is one life worth saving the world? For Ellie it wasn't obviously, but there's no way in hell someone would have done different than Joel.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Obviously not, but people don't act rational all the time. He lied because if he would have told the truth, ellie would have hated him because he made the decision for her. She thought she was destined to help humanity and Joel took that away from her. Obviously Joel didn't have a chance to decide either, he wasn't given a choice so he made what any decent person would have done. Maybe if he would have told Ellie what happened since the begining, Ellie would have understood Joel. But lying all the time about it, making Ellie think she served not purpose made things a lot worse. And understand Joel, he was afraid of losing her so he took no chance and decided to lie. Let's take things into perspective here, Joel killed the only person capable of saving the world, curing all these people because he didn't want to loose a child he loves. Is one life worth saving the world? For Ellie it wasn't obviously, but there's no way in hell someone would have done different than Joel.

I agree but I think the writers cheat a bit by having Joel give that look in the last Marlene scene and having him lie to nudge impressions towards Joel being more in the wrong than right. Why are the Fireflies let of the hook? Why shouldn't Ellie ever get to know how the Fireflies conducted business?

About saving the world, assuming the best of the Fireflies that they can produce enough and distribute it worldwide for free, part II shows that humanity has the luxury of fighting each other while dealing with the virus. A vaccine doesn't help against getting your throat ripped out and we're not told how many people die/turn from breathing spores. A mass produced vaccine would've improved the world but saved it would be a stretch IMO.