Support NeoGAF

[Ulysses 31]

Tiresome, isn't it.

Every time this debate has played out over the years. Every single time we have to listen to people condemning Joel & calling him all the selfish pieces of shit under the sun.

For saving the life of a child that he loved.

Riiight...

But then when it comes to the Fireflies, those good guys trying to save humanity, those terrorists responsible for how many bombings? How many deaths? Those stand up characters ready to murder a child? All the excuses of the day get trotted out for them. It's the bigger picture yo. The needs of the many fam.

The truth is that the world of the first game was populated with monsters. The infected & the humans. Joel, Tess, the Fireflies & everybody else.

Ellie represented innocence & actual, real humanity. Something good. She rekindled Joel's humanity & their relationship became one of real, human love. Over the course of their journey together, they convinced themselves that the Fireflies also represented something good but when it came to judgement time they didn't. The Fireflies failed. They may have started out with noble goals but they had become monsters too, as proven by their willingness to murder an innocent child, which is wrong & it doesn't matter how you try to dress it up for goodness sake.

In the end, it took a monster to see the other monsters for what they were. Joel was no angel. He had become a bad, bad man during that 20 year gap but by the end his eyes had been opened once again by Ellie & he rediscovered what it was to be good again. It was as simple as being a loving father. So he was perfectly placed to see straight through Marlene & the Fireflie's shoddy, bullshit justifications & he was more than capable of doing what was necessary to stop their horrific act, with his own horrific act.

There were no angels in part 1, with the possible exception of Ellie. There were different monsters. Some of them were unaware & simple, like the infected. Some of them fully aware & nihilistic, like the hunters. Some of them completely deluded & in the end very dangerous, like the Fireflies. Some of them had been brutal & nasty but by the end, were trying to change & be better again, like Joel.

But forget all of that. Joel was just a selfish piece of shit who doomed humanity there's nothing else to say end of story

Yeah, TLUO2 tried hard to improve the Fireflies image...

 

[Ulysses 31]

Joel literally used to ambush innocent people. Murder and did all the sort of bad things between Sarah's death right to the point he meets ellie. Joel being a bad guy is a straight fact that for some reason you guys are ignoring

Joel's done bad things but does he actually screw people over who've done nothing to him or Ellie in TLOU1? TLOU is a setting where to the good guy is a bad guy and the bad guys are even worse.

I don't think Joel is a "good" person just to be clear, when he killed the one he tortured for info afterwards, that pissed me off the first time I saw it.

 

[SLB1904]

I don't think Joel is a "good" person just to be clear, when he killed the one he tortured for info afterwards, that pissed me off the first time I saw it.

You mean when he tortured that cannibal to know know ellie whereabouts?
Dude, that fucker deserved it.

 

[Ulysses 31]

You mean when he tortured that cannibal to know know ellie whereabouts?
Dude, that fucker deserved it.

I may just be me sensibilities but I thought the dude was incapacitated enough and not worth a bullet which is fairly precious in that world(at least on hard+ difficulty )

 

[Self]

Joel literally used to ambush innocent people. Murder and did all the sort of bad things between Sarah's death right to the point he meets ellie. Joel being a bad guy is a straight fact that for some reason you guys are ignoring

To return the favor, what you guys are ignoring is that Joel has a past, a present and a future. In the present as we experience him he does outrages and wrong things, but also wonderful and right things.
You just decided to judge him on your 'noble' terms without acknowledging the world he lives in.

 

[SLB1904]

To return the favor, what you guys are ignoring is that Joel has a past, a present and a future. In the present as we experience him he does outrages and wrong things, but also wonderful and right things.
You just decided to judge him on your 'noble' terms without acknowledging the world he lives in.

That I agree with you. But some sometimes you can escape your past. We can agree he redeem himself. We agree that what he did to save ellie was the right thing to do. But we can also agree you cant escape your past. What happen to joel is his wrong doings catching up with him.

Even in real life someone commit crimes go to jail and do his sentence but in the eyes of the people he did wrong isnt enough.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Pretty much spot on

Still love the game.

 

[Self]

That I agree with you. But some sometimes you can escape your past. We can agree he redeem himself. We agree that what he did to save ellie was the right thing to do. But we can also agree you cant escape your past. What happen to joel is his wrong doings catching up with him.

Even in real life someone commit crimes go to jail and do his sentence but in the eyes of the people he did wrong isnt enough.

We agree mostly. What I don't agree to is that the past must absolutely determine what you will ultimately become in the future. I have an optimistic outlook on the human condition and strongly believe that people can ultimately change. Even if they may struggle and fall along the way.

Edit: I see you mentioned that briefly. We agree.

 

[Clear]

We agree mostly. What I don't agree to is that the past must absolutely determine what you will ultimately become in the future. I have an optimistic outlook on the human condition and strongly believe that people can ultimately change. Even if they may struggle and fall along the way.

Edit: I see you mentioned that briefly. We agree.

Your feelings are irrelevant though. We're discussing someone else's work, and its THE constant element despite our individual subjective perspectives.

Its why I base my arguments on the content of the text, not my personal moral or ethical outlook.

No offence, but if an argument is non-diegetic, i.e. not drawn from within the work and its worldview, its shifting focus to a position that is solely that of the person making the argument, and I don't find that useful or productive.

 

[Self]

Your feelings are irrelevant though. We're discussing someone else's work,

Sure, but your feelings are irrelevant as well. Since it's not your work I'm judging or people judge here in general you don't have any position to negate their interpretation. If you are basing your interpretation purely on facts you should arrive at a agnostic position. But you don't. You are simply assuming while taking a moral highground which is never advocated and supported within the work itself.

Also take note that I was not answering to you on your chosen quote. You haven't provided an answer/stance to the my last post directed at you.

 

[MeteorVII]

That was a really stupid video.

 

[rkofan87]

imo if you like the ending of 1 you are going to hate 2 if you hate the ending of 1 you will love 2.

 

[GhostOfTsu]

Tiresome, isn't it.

Every time this debate has played out over the years. Every single time we have to listen to people condemning Joel & calling him all the selfish pieces of shit under the sun.

For saving the life of a child that he loved.

Riiight...

But then when it comes to the Fireflies, those good guys trying to save humanity, those terrorists responsible for how many bombings? How many deaths? Those stand up characters ready to murder a child? All the excuses of the day get trotted out for them. It's the bigger picture yo. The needs of the many fam.

The truth is that the world of the first game was populated with monsters. The infected & the humans. Joel, Tess, the Fireflies & everybody else.

Ellie represented innocence & actual, real humanity. Something good. She rekindled Joel's humanity & their relationship became one of real, human love. Over the course of their journey together, they convinced themselves that the Fireflies also represented something good but when it came to judgement time they didn't. The Fireflies failed. They may have started out with noble goals but they had become monsters too, as proven by their willingness to murder an innocent child, which is wrong & it doesn't matter how you try to dress it up for goodness sake.

In the end, it took a monster to see the other monsters for what they were. Joel was no angel. He had become a bad, bad man during that 20 year gap but by the end his eyes had been opened once again by Ellie & he rediscovered what it was to be good again. It was as simple as being a loving father. So he was perfectly placed to see straight through Marlene & the Fireflie's shoddy, bullshit justifications & he was more than capable of doing what was necessary to stop their horrific act, with his own horrific act.

There were no angels in part 1, with the possible exception of Ellie. There were different monsters. Some of them were unaware & simple, like the infected. Some of them fully aware & nihilistic, like the hunters. Some of them completely deluded & in the end very dangerous, like the Fireflies. Some of them had been brutal & nasty but by the end, were trying to change & be better again, like Joel.

But forget all of that. Joel was just a selfish piece of shit who doomed humanity there's nothing else to say end of story

Beautiful post and I agree 100%. A pity it's coming so late in the thread and people might miss it. Watch DForce and his drones come in and defend his treatment in TLOU2 again. But Abby!!!

Yeah, TLUO2 tried hard to improve the Fireflies image...

Most people that are defending TLOU2 are going by the fake flashbacks they filmed, not by what actually happened in TLOU1. It's obvious by the way they all repeat the same points about the fireflies. A shame.

Neil had to redo the flashbacks because the new story didn't fit and yet dumb people are still denying it. So transparent.

 

[GhostOfTsu]

Joel literally used to ambush innocent people. Murder and did all the sort of bad things between Sarah's death right to the point he meets ellie. Joel being a bad guy is a straight fact that for some reason you guys are ignoring

We know but so what? We don't see any of it in TLOU1. He was an antihero and TLOU1 was his redemption arc. That's what we played. The rest was his backstory.

It didn't have any impact at all on his character until TLOU2 came out. Suddenly we have people like you coming "but he was mean to those random people!!!". Who cares?

 

[DForce]

What's funny is that people say the ending to the first game was suppose to be mortally ambiguous then they go on to say, "The cure wouldn't mean anything. There's no way a cure would save the world. Joel made the right decision because the Fireflies were trying to murder Ellie".

If you believe this, then you missed the entire concept of "mortally ambiguity". You're basically telling people your decision is the right one and any other opinion is wrong.


The Fireflies aren't these murdering terrorist creating in the minds of people who try to make Joel out to be this angel. If you ask for evidence from the first game that supports or proves their point regarding all these things, it's clouded with nothing more than fan theories that are not actually found in the game.

Joel was in fact acting selfishly. He stopped them from creating a vaccine and tried to make sure that they never came after her again. He went even further by lying to Ellie and making sure no one from the Fireflies would come back looking for her. It was selfish because he did NOT want to Ellie to make that decision and he knew she would sacrifice her life for a cure.

That was the point of the ending. Ellie knew Joel lied and there was no other reason why.

If you think this somehow "changed" in the second game, think again. Neil Druckmann has specifically stated this way back in 2013 @ 40:40.



Nothing has changed going into TLOU 2. Joel stuck by his decision when he told Ellie if the Lord gave him a second chance, he would do it all over again. The game doesn't tell us Joel made the right or wrong decision, it only tells us that it's a decision Ellie didn't want and he paid the price for trying to hide the truth from her.

 

[Mediocre Arachno-Lad]

Of course the fireflies can not produce and distribute the vaccine to the whole world.

Which is why they can't be trusted with one specimen from which the vaccine can be created.
Long as Ellie's alive someone else'll come around. Having brainwashed hobos cut her up then and there is about the dumbest thing you could do.

Neil Druckmann has specifically stated this way back in 2013 @ 40:40.

Man I sure love for the chef to come over after I finish my dinner, and explain to me how it tastes.

 

[rofif]

imo if you like the ending of 1 you are going to hate 2 if you hate the ending of 1 you will love 2.

I love both

 

[DForce]

Man I sure love for the chef to come over after I finish my dinner, and explain to me how it tastes.

It doesn't really need explanation from the creator. It was laid out simply for us. Some fans on the other hand love to put their own spin on things instead of accepting the story for what it is.

It's the fact that people are just in denial.

 

[Clear]

Sure, but your feelings are irrelevant as well. Since it's not your work I'm judging or people judge here in general you don't have any position to negate their interpretation. If you are basing your interpretation purely on facts you should arrive at a agnostic position. But you don't. You are simply assuming while taking a moral highground which is never advocated and supported within the work itself.

Also take note that I was not answering to you on your chosen quote. You haven't provided an answer/stance to the my last post directed at you.

No there's deduction based on observable fact and there's stuff projected from your personal thoughts and feelings!

Ask yourself, when you arrived at a conclusion was the process of getting there intellectual or instinctual/emotional?

You keep claiming I'm assuming a moral highground when all I'm doing is applying basic moral equivalence across the scenario and characters. I'm not saying the Fireflies are the "goodies" and Joel is the "baddy", just they both have positives and negatives.

The bottom line is that the game puts in a lot of time to humanize Joel, and make him sympathetic. But as Marlene tries to get across to him at the end EVERYONE HAS LOST SOMEONE. In the sequel Abby has a tragic backstory, but that doesn't count apparently because Joel is the star of the show, and him getting killed off is an unpardonable sin.

The point is within the context of the fiction, there are no "stars". These characters aren't in an entertainment, they are struggling to survive in a dystopian world. There's a fundamental disconnect between the perspective of the person playing the game, and the experience of the characters within it's fictional reality, and the internal logic of the storytelling must follow the latter.

The morality and action of that "inner-life" is what I'm talking about; and if you look at Joel through the eyes of pretty much any other character in the game, he is exactly what I said he is.

 

[MeteorVII]

No there's deduction based on observable fact and there's stuff projected from your personal thoughts and feelings!

Ask yourself, when you arrived at a conclusion was the process of getting there intellectual or instinctual/emotional?

You keep claiming I'm assuming a moral highground when all I'm doing is applying basic moral equivalence across the scenario and characters. I'm not saying the Fireflies are the "goodies" and Joel is the "baddy", just they both have positives and negatives.

The bottom line is that the game puts in a lot of time to humanize Joel, and make him sympathetic. But as Marlene tries to get across to him at the end EVERYONE HAS LOST SOMEONE. In the sequel Abby has a tragic backstory, but that doesn't count apparently because Joel is the star of the show, and him getting killed off is an unpardonable sin.

The point is within the context of the fiction, there are no "stars". These characters aren't in an entertainment, they are struggling to survive in a dystopian world. There's a fundamental disconnect between the perspective of the person playing the game, and the experience of the characters within it's fictional reality, and the internal logic of the storytelling must follow the latter.

The morality and action of that "inner-life" is what I'm talking about; and if you look at Joel through the eyes of pretty much any other character in the game, he is exactly what I said he is.

Trying to describe ethical nuances to the simple-minded is a lost cause. This is why political discussions always sucks. Don’t even bother.

 

[Methos#1975]

To return the favor, what you guys are ignoring is that Joel has a past, a present and a future. In the present as we experience him he does outrages and wrong things, but also wonderful and right things.
You just decided to judge him on your 'noble' terms without acknowledging the world he lives in.

I mean that's all nice and all but it's things that ultimately are of no virtue to the narrative since Abby is understandably responding to one specific event and action that Joel took that singularly messed up her life. She has no idea of his character growth or that he has became a sorta of decent person, he murdered her father, a person she loved and saw no wrong in, she dedicated her life to correcting that wrong and taking Joel out.

It's really no different from Ellie then taking up the anger and hunting Abby down and her friends down. We learn through the game narrative that these are not bad people either, most of them are downright noble. But Ellie is blinded to that fact just as Abby was blinded to Joel's nobleiness. If anything, this series shows us that being good in this game world is a useless pursuit that gets you nowhere.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Didn't read the thread, but I completely agree with the title. I would've done the exact same thing as Joel if in the same position. Fuck that cult.

 

[SLB1904]

We know but so what? We don't see any of it in TLOU1. He was an antihero and TLOU1 was his redemption arc. That's what we played. The rest was his backstory.

It didn't have any impact at all on his character until TLOU2 came out. Suddenly we have people like you coming "but he was mean to those random people!!!". Who cares?

Facts dont care about your feelings. Deal with it!.gif

 

[Bilbo Baggins]

What's funny is that people say the ending to the first game was suppose to be mortally ambiguous then they go on to say, "The cure wouldn't mean anything. There's no way a cure would save the world. Joel made the right decision because the Fireflies were trying to murder Ellie".

If you believe this, then you missed the entire concept of "mortally ambiguity". You're basically telling people your decision is the right one and any other opinion is wrong.


The Fireflies aren't these murdering terrorist creating in the minds of people who try to make Joel out to be this angel. If you ask for evidence from the first game that supports or proves their point regarding all these things, it's clouded with nothing more than fan theories that are not actually found in the game.

Joel was in fact acting selfishly. He stopped them from creating a vaccine and tried to make sure that they never came after her again. He went even further by lying to Ellie and making sure no one from the Fireflies would come back looking for her. It was selfish because he did NOT want to Ellie to make that decision and he knew she would sacrifice her life for a cure.

That was the point of the ending. Ellie knew Joel lied and there was no other reason why.

If you think this somehow "changed" in the second game, think again. Neil Druckmann has specifically stated this way back in 2013 @ 40:40.



Nothing has changed going into TLOU 2. Joel stuck by his decision when he told Ellie if the Lord gave him a second chance, he would do it all over again. The game doesn't tell us Joel made the right or wrong decision, it only tells us that it's a decision Ellie didn't want and he paid the price for trying to hide the truth from her.

Nobody is trying to say Joel was an angel in the first game. Nobody. That's just not true. He quite clearly was a decent man in the beginning, who became a very bad man during the 20 year gap & then started to become good again during his time spent caring for & protecting Ellie.

Nobody is saying he was an angel.

The Fireflies quite blatantly were murderous terrorists in part 1. The evidence for that is their terrorist activities & their attempt to murder Ellie for the cause. It's very straightforward & is right there, in the game.

So given these facts, yes people are saying that Joel was right to save the life of an innocent child he loved. Because of course it's right to save the life of an innocent child. I honestly find it ridiculous that this simple, basic fact has to be repeated over & over again as if it's some speculative theory.

Again, the Fireflies were going to kill an innocent child & were trying to convince themselves that it was morally justified. They had become monsters. Joel was right to stop that horror.

It's wrong to kill innocent children. People who try to do that are bad. Someone who stops that is right.

 

[DForce]

Nobody is trying to say Joel was an angel in the first game. Nobody. That's just not true. He quite clearly was a decent man in the beginning, who became a very bad man during the 20 year gap & then started to become good again during his time spent caring for & protecting Ellie.

Nobody is saying he was an angel.

The Fireflies quite blatantly were murderous terrorists in part 1. The evidence for that is their terrorist activities & their attempt to murder Ellie for the cause. It's very straightforward & is right there, in the game.

So given these facts, yes people are saying that Joel was right to save the life of an innocent child he loved. Because of course it's right to save the life of an innocent child. I honestly find it ridiculous that this simple, basic fact has to be repeated over & over again as if it's some speculative theory.

Again, the Fireflies were going to kill an innocent child & were trying to convince themselves that it was morally justified. They had become monsters. Joel was right to stop that horror.

It's wrong to kill innocent children. People who try to do that are bad. Someone who stops that is right.

If it wasn't true, then they wouldn't say Joel made the right decision and he was stopping the fireflies from creating a horrific act because the cure was not guaranteed.

It's, "Joel made the right decision and there was no way the Fireflies could possibly make a vaccine and a rundown hospital with limited medial experience. Joel knew this and that's why he saved Ellie".


If Joel made the right decision, he would've walked in that medical room, waited for Ellie to regain consciousness and asked her himself. But that's not what happened. He knew there was a chance Ellie would sacrifice herself and that's why he tried to hide the truth from her. This is not to say that the Fireflies are innocent because they didn't ask for Ellie's consent either, but they did have good intentions that were not acts of terrorism. The had a chance to cure the world and that was ultimately their goal. That's the point of the morally ambiguous ending. Save one you love or save millions.

People who try to say that the Joel just tried to stop this horror are not being honest. They know why he tried to hide the truth from Ellie and it wasn't because there was a chance that the cure might not work as many people believe.

 

[rofif]

If it wasn't true, then they wouldn't say Joel made the right decision and he was stopping the fireflies from creating a horrific act because the cure was not guaranteed.

It's, "Joel made the right decision and there was no way the Fireflies could possibly make a vaccine and a rundown hospital with limited medial experience. Joel knew this and that's why he saved Ellie".


If Joel made the right decision, he would've walked in that medical room, waited for Ellie to regain consciousness and asked her himself. But that's not what happened. He knew there was a chance Ellie would sacrifice herself and that's why he tried to hide the truth from her. This is not to say that the Fireflies are innocent because they didn't ask for Ellie's consent either, but they did have good intentions that were not acts of terrorism. The had a chance to cure the world and that was ultimately their goal. That's the point of the morally ambiguous ending. Save one you love or save millions.

People who try to say that the Joel just tried to stop this horror are not being honest. They know why he tried to hide the truth from Ellie and it wasn't because there was a chance that the cure might not work as many people believe.

Well, there was no time for him to make a tea in the operating room and wait lol.
Of course he killed all these fuckers to save his daughter. No matter if they were good or bad.
If they were portrayed as thugs in TLOU2, it would change NOTHING. Abby would still want revenge. This conversation if fireflies are good or bad is meaningless

 

[SLB1904]

Well, there was no time for him to make a tea in the operating room and wait lol.
Of course he killed all these fuckers to save his daughter. No matter if hey were good or bad.
If they were portrayed as thugs in TLOU2, it would change NOTHING. Abby would still want revenge. This conversation if fireflies are good or bad is meaningless

This. People think we are trying to defend the fireflies lol

 

[DForce]

Well, there was no time for him to make a tea in the operating room and wait lol.
Of course he killed all these fuckers to save his daughter. No matter if hey were good or bad.
If they were portrayed as thugs in TLOU2, it would change NOTHING. Abby would still want revenge. This conversation if fireflies are good or bad is meaningless

Yes, he killed everyone to save Ellie, but having her make her own decision was never an option for him.

I just changed some my thoughts on this.

Fancy way of saying we gotta kill the fucking kid. And now they're asking for my go ahead.

I just gave the go ahead to proceed with the surgery. I really doubt I had much of a choice, asking me was more of a formality.

I no longer see it as Joel vs the Fireflies, but Joel vs Marlene (even though she's part of the Fireflies). It seems more personal since Marlene is just as much (or even more) than a parent figure than Joel. It's not much relevance, but it's something that we often forget when looking at this situation.

 

[Self]

You keep claiming I'm assuming a moral highground when all I'm doing is applying basic moral equivalence across the scenario and characters. I'm not saying the Fireflies are the "goodies" and Joel is the "baddy", just they both have positives and negatives.

Then I misunderstood you. Thanks for clarification. I had the impression you were arguing that Joel is the 'bad guy' of the game while the fireflies are somehow considered to be positive/the saviors.

I mean that's all nice and all but it's things that ultimately are of no virtue to the narrative since Abby is understandably responding to one specific event and action that Joel

Sure, but that doesn't mean that you can't judge the events on your own given the information you can gather. Abby reacts to a partial insight into what really happend. She has a distorted picture of the events, Ellie as well. Only we as players can judge the whole picture.
To say x or y is the bad guy/girl is just to simplistic for the complexity of what is happening.

 

[Methos#1975]

Then I misunderstood you. Thanks for clarification. I had the impression you were arguing that Joel is the 'bad guy' of the game while the fireflies are somehow considered to be positive/the saviors.



Sure, but that doesn't mean that you can't judge the events on your own given the information you can gather. Abby reacts to a partial insight into what really happend. She has a distorted picture of the events, Ellie as well. Only we as players can judge the whole picture.
To say x or y is the bad guy/girl is just to simplistic for the complexity of what is happening.

Yeah but that is the issue isn't it? These characters aren't responding to these events as some omnipresent outside viewer as we. They are responding based on their singular individual insight on these events and in response to how they were singularly impacted by them. Who is right or wrong is ultimately irrevelant to the narrative since they all think they are rightous in their actions while being judged as unrighteous by the other side. Within the context of the game narrative our judgement on the action of each player really doesn't matter.

 

[Bilbo Baggins]

If it wasn't true, then they wouldn't say Joel made the right decision and he was stopping the fireflies from creating a horrific act because the cure was not guaranteed.

It's, "Joel made the right decision and there was no way the Fireflies could possibly make a vaccine and a rundown hospital with limited medial experience. Joel knew this and that's why he saved Ellie".


If Joel made the right decision, he would've walked in that medical room, waited for Ellie to regain consciousness and asked her himself. But that's not what happened. He knew there was a chance Ellie would sacrifice herself and that's why he tried to hide the truth from her. This is not to say that the Fireflies are innocent because they didn't ask for Ellie's consent either, but they did have good intentions that were not acts of terrorism. The had a chance to cure the world and that was ultimately their goal. That's the point of the morally ambiguous ending. Save one you love or save millions.

People who try to say that the Joel just tried to stop this horror are not being honest. They know why he tried to hide the truth from Ellie and it wasn't because there was a chance that the cure might not work as many people believe.

Dude. It's wrong to kill children.

Arguments about if "this" had happened, or if "that" had happened mean nothing. It's wrong to kill children. I honestly don't care what excuses anyone could try & come up with. It doesn't matter if the magical cure was 100% guaranteed to work, it's still wrong to kill children. There is no "noble goal" that is worth sacrificing the life of an innocent child.

Again, this simple fact cuts through all the garbage "moral ambiguity" of the ending. It could've been a different discussion if Ellie was an adult & specifically made the choice, on her own, consciously. That's not what happened though. Ellie was an innocent child & the Fireflies deliberately kept her unconscious & were going to kill her.

That's wrong & that's all there is to it. Joel was right to save her life from those monsters.

 

[Ulysses 31]

She has no idea of his character growth or that he has became a sorta of decent person, he murdered her father, a person she loved and saw no wrong in, she dedicated her life to correcting that wrong and taking Joel out.

Well she kinda got a glimpse of it when he saved her from the horde but Abby's the kinda gal where that didn't count for anything.

 

[Self]

Within the context of the game narrative our judgement on the action of each player really doesn't matter.

That was never the point of discussion - obviously.

The point is that TLOU never makes clear who is right and wrong - and for good reasons. It is agnostic in that regard or ambiguous if you prefer. Only a moral agent can decide (subjectively of course) who is ultimately right or wrong, since the work itself doesn't judge. I'm against the notion that Joel is the 'bad guy' screwing humanities future given the facts presented within the game itself. An objective and definitive claim just cannot be made. The argument that people perceive Joel as the 'bad guy' doesn't change anything in regards to his final and most crucial decision. Even if the author himself would support a certain view it wouldn't change anything, because the product is final, finished and out in the open.
It would only mean that the author has failed in regards to his intent.
I'm not implying that's the case here.

 

[Kholinar]

Dude. It's wrong to kill children.

Arguments about if "this" had happened, or if "that" had happened mean nothing. It's wrong to kill children. I honestly don't care what excuses anyone could try & come up with. It doesn't matter if the magical cure was 100% guaranteed to work, it's still wrong to kill children. There is no "noble goal" that is worth sacrificing the life of an innocent child.

Again, this simple fact cuts through all the garbage "moral ambiguity" of the ending. It could've been a different discussion if Ellie was an adult & specifically made the choice, on her own, consciously. That's not what happened though. Ellie was an innocent child & the Fireflies deliberately kept her unconscious & were going to kill her.

That's wrong & that's all there is to it. Joel was right to save her life from those monsters.

You're asserting your own views on morality as superior without properly explaining why. Killing children is wrong? Under many contexts, I'm sure. But killing a child to save billions? You need to explain the morality behind valuing a single individual over many. You're also portraying the Fireflies' decision as morally inferior to Joel's despite Ellie's continued existence only serving Joel in particular while simply leaving her to the Fireflies benefits billions.

 

[AJUMP23]

Can what Joel did be wrong and also be justified? I think it can be. He didn't have to kill the doctors, but he also should have saved Ellie. Saving Ellie was the right thing to do, but her sacrificed could have saved a lot of people. But it isn't worth sacrificing one life for the potential to save others.

 

[DForce]

Dude. It's wrong to kill children.

Arguments about if "this" had happened, or if "that" had happened mean nothing. It's wrong to kill children. I honestly don't care what excuses anyone could try & come up with. It doesn't matter if the magical cure was 100% guaranteed to work, it's still wrong to kill children. There is no "noble goal" that is worth sacrificing the life of an innocent child.

Again, this simple fact cuts through all the garbage "moral ambiguity" of the ending. It could've been a different discussion if Ellie was an adult & specifically made the choice, on her own, consciously. That's not what happened though. Ellie was an innocent child & the Fireflies deliberately kept her unconscious & were going to kill her.

That's wrong & that's all there is to it. Joel was right to save her life from those monsters.

You're projecting your personal feelings. The ending was made to be morally ambiguous so there's no possible way that it cuts through anything. If it was all for the "wrong" decision, then they wouldn't even try saving the world. Ellie was capable of making the decision herself and Joel made sure she wasn't able to. The innocent child narrative to give your argument weight doesn't work. Ellie is her own person and she could make the decision herself.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Ellie was capable of making the decision herself and Joel made sure she wasn't able to.

Don't you mean the Fireflies? Expecting someone to just stand by and let a loved one be killed without informed consent is a recipe for violent escalation.

 

[DForce]

Don't you mean the Fireflies? Expecting someone to just stand by and let a loved one be killed without informed consent is a recipe for violent escalation.

Joel and Marlene didn't ask for Ellie's consent. In the end, Ellie wanted to sacrifice herself and didn't agree with Joel's decision. I'm not going to sit here all day and watch you spin the story because that was the point of the ending and how it played out in TLOU 2.

 

[Mediocre Arachno-Lad]

Some fans on the other hand love to put their own spin on things instead of accepting the story for what it is.

Some fans love to take Druckman's soapbox ramblings as gospel instead of accepting the ambiguity of the original story, and especially the ending, as it was in the finished work.
All Drucknann's done in that video you linked is told us that Dumbledore was gay.
Nobody fuckin' asked.

In the end, Ellie wanted to sacrifice herself and didn't agree with Joel's decision.

As per sequel retcon, not the original story.
INB4 that "it can't be all for nothing" line, while being blind to all the plans Ellie and Joel were making for the future minutes later.

If they were portrayed as thugs in TLOU2, it would change NOTHING.

It would completely deflate Ellie's conflict with Joel, and make Abby morally unsalvageable, which is precisely why it was changed in the sequel, but whatever you say.
It wound't be changed if it changed nothing. Signed, Captain Obvious.

 

[DForce]

As per sequel retcon, not the original story.
INB4 that "it can't be all for nothing" line, while being blind to all the plans Ellie and Joel were making for the future minutes later.

No.
Ellie made plans because she didn't know what would happen at the hospital. If they both knew what would happen, they would've stayed with Tommy back in Jackson before heading out to find the Fireflies.

Some fans love to take Druckman's soapbox ramblings as gospel instead of accepting the moral ambiguity of the original story, and especially the ending, as it was in the finished work.

It was finished work. Ellie knew Joel lied at the end and based on her expression, she wasn't happy. Neil shouldn't have to explain this to anyone other than the people who failed to figure it out themselves.

 

[Maxwell Jacob Friedman]

I think they make Ellie's character even worse by not having her question that the Fireflies would've killed her without informed consent and that she would've been OK with leaving Joel without ever saying good bye to him first. It also raising questions on how much the father-daughter relationship they built up really means to her.

They did address that and Ellie didnt care and she still wanted to die there. When Joel tells her the truth "making a vaccine would have killed you in the process" she knew after that the reason took her out while she was still under drugs was because he murdered them all and took her whilst the drugs were still wearing off also against her will. She knew she wouldnt have been able to say good bye and she still comes back to on the porch "i should have died in that hospital, my life would have fuckn mattered"

Joel even statea in the beginning monologue "she wanted her immunity to mean something" and he took that from ger thus the rift between them when she finds out

 

[Mediocre Arachno-Lad]

Ellie made plans because she didn't know what would happen at the hospital.

Exactly, which also means she made no plans to sacrifice herself.

Neil shouldn't have to explain this to anyone other than the people who failed to figure it out themselves.

Neil isn't explaining that Ellie knew that it was a lie, which is what everybody and their dog understood.
He's explaining her planning to part with Joel based off of that, closing the door on the possibility of her accepting the lie for Joel's sake. You know, shutting down the ambiguity of it?
How much bad faith are you willing to roll out for this curly git?

 

[Ulysses 31]

Joel and Marlene didn't ask for Ellie's consent. In the end, Ellie wanted to sacrifice herself and didn't agree with Joel's decision. I'm not going to sit here all day and watch you spin the story because that was the point of the ending and how it played out in TLOU 2.

In the end she's also never been told the full context under which Joel got her out of the hospital. Her decisions and judgements are not well informed which may explain why some have issues with her attitude in TLOU2.

 

[DForce]

Exactly, which also means she made no plans to sacrifice herself.

And what you're saying has no relevance.

Neil isn't explaining that Ellie knew that it was a lie, which is what everybody and their dog understood.
He's explaining her planning to part with Joel based off of that, closing the door on the possibility of her accepting the lie for Joel's sake.
How much bad faith are you willing to roll out for this curly git?

If you knew why I timestamped the video, then you wouldn't bother replying to me if you "understood" my point. The point was to show that Ellie knew Joel lied to her and she wasn't happy. This is far different than what some others are trying to portray and that Ellie wasn't mad or Joel saved her because he thought there was a chance the fireflies couldn't make a cure.

 

[DForce]

In the end she's also never been told the full context under which Joel got her out of the hospital. Her decisions and judgements are not well informed which may explain why some have issues with her attitude in TLOU2.

She knew Joel lied.
This was also shown to us in the second game.

Like I said, I don't have time for your spins. You're going against what was already established in both games.

 

[Ulysses 31]

They did address that and Ellie didnt care and she still wanted to die there. When Joel tells her the truth "making a vaccine would have killed you in the process" she knew after that the reason took her out while she was still under drugs was because he murdered them all and took her whilst the drugs were still wearing off also against her will. She knew she wouldnt have been able to say good bye and she still comes back to on the porch "i should have died in that hospital, my life would have fuckn mattered"

Joel even statea in the beginning monologue "she wanted her immunity to mean something" and he took that from ger thus the rift between them when she finds out

So that does make her less likeable when she puts in all the effort to grow closer to Joel to the point he sees her as another daughter while at the same time she's ready to cut him out of her life at a moments notice for the vaccine. Even more so when she knows how much the loss of Joel's daughter has affected him. She goes along with future plans, says nothing when Joel says he'll teach her how to swim some day. I doubt Ellie was written to be this selfishly cruel when it came to the vaccine(in TLOU1 at least).

Not a bad word about the Fireflies and how they handled the situation? It was not established that the operation had to be done when they planned it so when they threatened violence at the slightest delay, they had a big hand in ruining chances for the vaccine too.

That's why the final part of TLOU1 falls apart a bit for me, felt too forced that the Fireflies wanted to operate asap and Joel lying about it when the Fireflies mishandled the situation. TLOU2 rolls with Joel letting the Fireflies off the hook which soured things a bit for me.

 

[Ulysses 31]

She knew Joel lied.
This was also shown to us in the second game.

Like I said, I don't have time for your spins. You're going against what was already established in both games.

Doesn't change that she's misinformed.

TLOU2 has been shown to change past events so I'm not taking it into consideration when talking about what happened at the hospital.

 

[DForce]

Doesn't change that she's misinformed.

TLOU2 has been shown to change past events so I'm not taking it into consideration when talking about what happened at the hospital.

"She's misinformed"

Joel admits to Ellie they were going to make a vaccine and he stopped them. It's common sense that in order to stop them, they would have tried to stop him by any means necessary, making the "because she was misinformed" narrative BS. Again, I'm done. I can't waste my time with someone who clearly lacks basic understanding of simple story structure.

 

[Ulysses 31]

"She's misinformed"

Joel admits to Ellie they were going to make a vaccine and he stopped them. It's common sense that in order to stop them, they would have tried to stop him by any means necessary, making the "because she was misinformed" narrative BS. Again, I'm done. I can't waste my time with someone who clearly lacks basic understanding of simple story structure.

How does it make sense for Joel to leave out that he wanted to see Ellie and that they wouldn't allow it and that they threatened his life(and hers)?

It's comment sense to share such information between people who care for each other.

Yes, Ellie becomes less likeable when even she doesn't question that the Fireflies were going to kill her under those conditions.

 

[Self]

She knew Joel lied.
This was also shown to us in the second game.

As long as Ellie isn't a mind reader, no. She was sceptical about his story, hence the confrontation in Part 2. He had to spell it out to her.

How does it make sense for Joel to leave out that he wanted to see Ellie and that they wouldn't allow it and that they threatened his life(and hers)?

It hadn't changed anything. Joel knew he had fucked up in her eyes.
He said he would do it again, hence he has no regrets. He just feels bad/pitty for her.