nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Last of Us 2 - SPOILERS!!!

Zero-Cool

A thread to openly discuss the full story, thoughts, issues, leaks, etc.

Mods, feel free to close it if unnecessary or apply thread rules.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Leroy42

BruteStock wrote: »

That outlook is predicated purely on the belief that Joel did the wrong thing for saving Ellie. I feel Jerry was wrong for wanting to crack Ellie's skull open for a vaccine that may or may not have made any difference. Abby father was going to murder a kid in cold blood. A decision like that can never be the right one.
Most people feel Joel made the right choice.
Jeremy Jahns gives his opinion on why Joel did the right thing.

https://youtu.be/sMSlH802M34?t=556

It isn't really about whether Joel made the right decision or not. It is how the decision was seen by others, how it impacted on others. Whether that particular decision was right or not does not take away that Joel is a pretty horrible person.

But he, I think, didn't make the decision because he wasn't sure it would work (he didn't know). He made it for himself. He couldn't face losing Ellie and as such decided that he was going to make the decision he made.

But from Abby's POV, and the rest of her gang, it was the wrong decision. Their friends and family were killed, the chance for a cure was gone, he father in particular was killed, and the Fireflies who they believed were on the right path, were destroyed. Not they are left fighting an endless war so no apparent reason.

The Raging Bile Duct

BruteStock wrote: »

That outlook is predicated purely on the belief that Joel did the wrong thing for saving Ellie. I feel Jerry was wrong for wanting to crack Ellie's skull open for a vaccine that may or may not have made any difference. Abby father was going to murder a kid in cold blood. A decision like that can never be the right one.
Most people feel Joel made the right choice.
Jeremy Jahns gives his opinion on why Joel did the right thing.

https://youtu.be/sMSlH802M34?t=556

The situation Abbey's father was facing with Ellie is a variation on the trolley problem from the sixties. A decision to sacrifice one life to save many, many more or do not which will result in more and more deaths and infections. It's a philosophical conundrum. The game never says that the vaccine may or may not work - in the reality presented, it is a given that the vaccine will succeed.

Penn

BruteStock wrote: »

That outlook is predicated purely on the belief that Joel did the wrong thing for saving Ellie. I feel Jerry was wrong for wanting to crack Ellie's skull open for a vaccine that may or may not have made any difference. Abby father was going to murder a kid in cold blood. A decision like that can never be the right one.
Most people feel Joel made the right choice.

I agree in a way that it's unlikely simply operating on Ellie would have produced a miracle vaccine. But it was the best and only way they could get closer to getting a vaccine. I'd disagree that it counts as "murdering a kid in cold blood" though. It was clearly a decision they struggled with, didn't know until she got there that that's what they would have to do (having x-rayed her), and there was no other way. Marlene takes the responsibility for that decision as leader of the Fireflies and being a friend of Ellie's mother. The doctor wouldn't have done it without Marlene giving the okay. It was a necessity.

But all of that wasn't really Joel's decision to make. He had no idea if they'd be able to make the vaccine. He saved Ellie but for as much selfish reasons as anything else. Both trying to replace what he lost with his daughter, and not wanting to lose Ellie. And as we saw in this game, it's not what Ellie wanted. She didn't know it would have resulted in her death, but she would have agreed to it had she known. Yes, maybe Marlene and the doctor should have given Ellie that choice, but it wasn't Joel's choice either. He also killed Abby's father who was the main doctor leading the research into trying to find a cure, hence why the Fireflies disbanded after his death, because they had no-one else.

I get your point, but I just think it's not definitive either way and that's the point. There is moral ambiguity in all these decisions, and in all these different perspectives. That can give these different opinions on which characters can be seen as sympathetic or antagonistic, or both. Like I said, every time I played TLOU1, every doctor in that surgery died. But I think it's also easy to see why Abby is absolutely justified in wanting to kill Joel and make it painful once you see what she lost because of it.

Zero-Cool

Such a great video, exactly how i feel about the story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh5gzGs-63Y

GottaGetGatt

Where are people getting the thinking that Abbys was Bit? It’s not from when Ellie frees the Prisoners? because when the one of Prisoner says she’s Bit, she’s referring to the bite mark on Ellie’s arm from when she was jumped by the two Rattlers.

Zero-Cool

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

Where are people getting the thinking that Abbys was Bit? It’s not from when Ellie frees the Prisoners? because when the one of Prisoner says she’s Bit, she’s referring to the bite mark on Ellie’s arm from when she was jumped by the two Rattlers.

I think it's from Abby biting Ellie, not being bit herself.

gimli2112

She bites her on the arm in the fight in the cinema/theater.

ok I don't know what I did with the link but it's on youtube

matrim

Zero-Cool wrote: »

I think it's from Abby biting Ellie, not being bit herself.

I think that in the fight between Abby and Elle in the theatre, Elle bites her to get free.

[Deleted User]

https://sp1st.com/news/the-last-of-us-2-cameo-theres-a-friendly-face-you-probably-didnt-recognize

Gustavo is in the game

[Deleted User]

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Such a great video, exactly how i feel about the story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh5gzGs-63Y

Very well constructed video!

Zero-Cool

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://sp1st.com/news/the-last-of-us-2-cameo-theres-a-friendly-face-you-probably-didnt-recognize

Gustavo is in the game

Saw him on my first stroll through town, stared at him playing for 5 minutes, brilliant cameo.

I forgot about the bite in the theater, still can't recall it but that was a hectic scene.

BruteStock

Penn wrote: »

I agree in a way that it's unlikely simply operating on Ellie would have produced a miracle vaccine. But it was the best and only way they could get closer to getting a vaccine. I'd disagree that it counts as "murdering a kid in cold blood" though. It was clearly a decision they struggled with, didn't know until she got there that that's what they would have to do (having x-rayed her), and there was no other way. Marlene takes the responsibility for that decision as leader of the Fireflies and being a friend of Ellie's mother. The doctor wouldn't have done it without Marlene giving the okay. It was a necessity.

But all of that wasn't really Joel's decision to make. He had no idea if they'd be able to make the vaccine. He saved Ellie but for as much selfish reasons as anything else. Both trying to replace what he lost with his daughter, and not wanting to lose Ellie. And as we saw in this game, it's not what Ellie wanted. She didn't know it would have resulted in her death, but she would have agreed to it had she known. Yes, maybe Marlene and the doctor should have given Ellie that choice, but it wasn't Joel's choice either. He also killed Abby's father who was the main doctor leading the research into trying to find a cure, hence why the Fireflies disbanded after his death, because they had no-one else.

I get your point, but I just think it's not definitive either way and that's the point. There is moral ambiguity in all these decisions, and in all these different perspectives. That can give these different opinions on which characters can be seen as sympathetic or antagonistic, or both. Like I said, every time I played TLOU1, every doctor in that surgery died. But I think it's also easy to see why Abby is absolutely justified in wanting to kill Joel and make it painful once you see what she lost because of it.

Just a few more things to consider.

Joel terminated Jerry , but he didn't terminate any hope for humanity to find a vaccine. The potential to extract some form of sample from Ellie's head still exists , and now that Ellie is older , she can make the choice for herself if presented with the same situation.

Joel saved Ellie from a decision that was not for one man to make. The way Jerry begged for Marlene's approval suggests it wasn't a hard decision for him to make either. He acted irrationally , spontaneously and without compassion. He wanted to move ahead with the surgery without telling Joel as he knew it wasn't his decision to make.

He wouldn't have done the procedure on his own daughter which is why Marlene called him out on it.

Plus , there would be a very short window of opportunity to administer a vaccine to newly infected before they are too far gone. Once that fungal starts growing on the host its game over. And who is the vaccine going to be given to? The country is entirely split up into different factions all in conflict with each other.
It would have been a different story if there was still some semblance of structure left in he world , then Ellies sacrifice would not have been in vain , as the combined efforts of all remaining medical personal could come together to develop a vaccine.
Thats not the world of TLOU. Joel was basically handing Ellie over to a group of bandits who had a surgeon along them. Anybody would have pulled her out of that situation without thinking twice.

This is why the fandom has been split down the middle. Most feel Joel didn't deserve to be butchered for what he done , so to expect the player to reconcile or sympathise with Abby was never going to happen. Druckmann wanted to revolutionise the way players feel about a games antagonist , but there just wan't enough substance to Abby and her character wasn't deep enough to elicit affection towards her.
Abby doesn't try to understand Joel or show him any sympathy. She doesn't stop to consider that her father might have been wrong for trying to kill Ellie behind Joel's back. She doesn't care that Joel was saving the life of a young girl.
She was still obviously going to kill Joel , but if the goal was to eventually get the player to question their hate towards her , her character had to be fleshed out a little more and her line of dialogue had to be more meaningful than - Joel.Miller Guess. You don't get to rush this old man.

All opinions at the end of the day. Its a testament to how good the first game ended that people still have such strong opinions on Joel's decision. I don't think the sequel left players with the same type of moral conundrum to mull over for years to come.

gimli2112

I never had ambiguity over Joel's decision in the first one. I took it for granted and believe it was presented that the vaccine would work and the world would be saved.

I didn't care. Ellie had to be saved.This is the videogame and world I signed up for.

Joshua J

I've seen it said with Game of thrones and I'm seeing it said for TLOU2 now. Subverting expectation. Why is giving people what they want such a bad idea?.

Zero-Cool

This is from the girlfriend reviews vid, great comparison shots between Ellie and Abby's journey.

https://imgur.com/pe4tjp4

johnny_ultimate

Joel didn’t just save Ellie at the end of the first game - he lied to her to cover up her decision. The final shot of the game is Ellie’s reaction to Joel swearing he’s telling the truth - there’s doubt and uncertainty in Ellie’s response, and eventually uneasy acceptance. This to me is why I find it hard to consider Joel’s actions worthy or decent - whatever about save her / save the world, even on a personal level he chose a path of a secret that will ultimately define their relationship, whether it gets out or not (and as this game makes unambiguously clear, it almost certainly does get out there).

For me, Joel didn’t end up as a “likeable” character because of that decision - but he was an interesting one, which is always more important (requiring a character to be likeable severely limits the storytelling options available). That he’d ultimately face the consequences of both his decision to save Ellie AND for the lie he told her seems like the most natural, inevitable continuation of the story. The game also follows up on the ending of the first game in broader thematic ways too. You’re forced to shoot that surgeon whether you like it or not - the game makes you complicit in what’s unfolding. The sequel is largely (at least so far) about interrogating that idea of player complicity, and their position as an active participant in a stream of violent deeds.

Whether it goes about it well is an entirely different argument, and it’s a general theme that’s been explored to varying degrees of success in other games like Bioshock, Spec Ops and Hotline Miami (overtly referenced here with an actual cameo appearance). But the fallout of Joel’s actions at the end of TLOU and the way the designers forced to player to play an active role in his decisions IMO presented a clearly morally murky conclusion to the game - and TLOU2 is that dialled up to 11, for better or worse.

Leroy42

Joshua J wrote: »

I've seen it said with Game of thrones and I'm seeing it said for TLOU2 now. Subverting expectation. Why is giving people what they want such a bad idea?.

What did people want? A rerun of the first game? A story where Joel and Ellie live happily ever after? The world of TLOU is not, and never was, like that.

Did anybody ask for the TLOU? No, ND created something that was amazing, that pulled people in and make an impact on them.

To bottle that lightning and do it again was always going to very difficult. It is why so many sequels struggle.

But the game itself is really great. I wouldn't give it a 10, probably a very solid 8. But I like that they tried to do something different.

I finished it a few days ago and too be honest I am still struggling to process how I feel about it. I am certainly feeling that Ellie, as I knew her, is lost. I am sad that she is such a mess, that she is broken.

I am unsure how I feel about Abby, but mostly that is because of Ellie. Had the story been just about Abby I think I would feel better about Abby, but it is hard to get past that.

I do think that Naughty Dog were at best disingenuous in their marketing, and while that is normal to an extent, I am not really sure why they felt they needed to be.

I didn't like the jarring aspect of the changeover. I am fine with playing as Abby, but to have Ellie in clear danger and then just tell me to park that and have to play through 10+ hours to see what happens, well it made me just want to rush through the Abby part. Especially the more grindy bits. And I think that takes away form the game.

There was a few times that I thought the game was over and each time I was relieved to see that there was more to come. But by the end, after the final scene, I just felt deflated. Confused. I felt that part of me had taken a beating, emotionally obviously.

I think over time this game will come to be seen in a better light. The wounds as still raw. Having said all that, there are some pacing issues, at certain stages it seems that the 'movie' sections are too long. There are some glaring plot holes. I think some of the other characters could have been fleshed out more. I never felt we really had the WLF explained to us. And the Rattlers came out of nowhere. Seemed to be no reason for their behaviour and felt a bit like an add on. But perhaps that is the basis for the next installment. Where Abby goes back for revenge.

But overall I am very glad that I got to play this game, that I got to experience this world and this franchise.

johnny_ultimate

Joshua J wrote: »

I've seen it said with Game of thrones and I'm seeing it said for TLOU2 now. Subverting expectation. Why is giving people what they want such a bad idea?.

There were no ‘expectations subverted’ in Game of Thrones. That series just descended into ****, lazy writing. If anything, it ended up as a boring slog of obvious, safe plot beats after an initial few series of unpredictable brutality.

‘Giving people what they want’ is a bad thing when it leads to dull, unimaginative storytelling. The Marvel films give fans precisely what they want, but for me - as someone who just likes good filmmaking above all else - they’re completely unimaginative and unadventurous, just film after film of bland aesthetics and rote storytelling.

Art is always most interesting when creatives take risks and challenge the audience. Sure, there’ll always be some place for something new but familiar and safe. But for me I’d be more intrigued by the noble failure that tries something new than just a prettier rehash.

Although honestly I think TLOU2 is far, far from a radical departure. Sure it takes some swerves narratively that might catch some players off guard (although as I suggested above hardly a departure from the first game) and makes some creative decisions some won’t like... but much of the game is indeed an expanded and refined version of the gameplay and world-building explored in the first game.

gimli2112

I'm enjoying reading both sides of the argument. TLOU 2 wasn't what I wanted. I didn't watch the final season of game of thrones. I guess I should have read the spoilers here too.

Joshua J

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

. That series just descended into ****, lazy writing. If anything, it ended up as a boring slog of obvious, safe plot beats after an initial few series of unpredictable brutality.

You've just described TLOU 2 imo. Brutal violence masking boring/repetitive gameplay and messy character development/motivations.

Ivefoundgod

Game of thrones went to **** as soon as the author was no longer involved and they had no books to refer to.

I would have no interest in another Ellie and Joel game and I’m glad they didn’t go that route. It doesn’t always hit the mark and like others have said the Abby section is jarring and leads to players rushing through that section. The Santa Barbara section feels tacked on and I really didn’t like the rattlers. All that said it’s still a definite 8/10 for me and I don’t recall any recent game giving me an even remotely similar experience. It deserves praise for that IMO.

al87987

Just finished a couple of hours ago. The first game was my favourite game ever and Joel my favourite gaming character. I had seen no spoilers on the game prior to playing so his death really knocked the stuffing out of me.

I was all ready for a simple revenge mission but what the game delivered was so much more than that. Seeing what Ellie was willing to do for vengeance made you sympathise with her less and less as the game wore on.

Obviously the switch to Abby had the opposite effect and it completely worked on me, when i finally got to fight Ellie in the theatre I was desperately trying to kill her and was quite pissed off Abby let her live. Judging by this thread looks like I'm the only one. I felt sure Abby would kill her and TLOU3 would see Dina trying to avenge the death of Ellie and her baby's father Jesse.

I don't understand the hate for ND or Abby really, everybody who has survived has done some awful things and will surely be the villain in someone else's story and how they portrayed that is a pretty remarkable achievement.

I also preferred the periphery characters in Abby's story like Manny and Owen to Ellies Tommy and Jesse etc...

Of course it was not as good as the original but it would be unrealistic to expect it to be, sequels by their nature are usually a case of diminishing returns but i thoroughly enjoyed the game.

A major aspect of how good a game/movie is for me is just how long it sticks in your mind after you're finished and I feel this will live long in mine.

mrkiscool2

al87987 wrote: »

Just finished a couple of hours ago. The first game was my favourite game ever and Joel my favourite gaming character. I had seen no spoilers on the game prior to playing so his death really knocked the stuffing out of me.

I was all ready for a simple revenge mission but what the game delivered was so much more than that. Seeing what Ellie was willing to do for vengeance made you sympathise with her less and less as the game wore on.

Obviously the switch to Abby had the opposite effect and it completely worked on me, when i finally got to fight Ellie in the theatre I was desperately trying to kill her and was quite pissed off Abby let her live. Judging by this thread looks like I'm the only one. I felt sure Abby would kill her and TLOU3 would see Dina trying to avenge the death of Ellie and her baby's father Jesse.

I don't understand the hate for ND or Abby really, everybody who has survived has done some awful things and will surely be the villain in someone else's story and how they portrayed that is a pretty remarkable achievement.

I also preferred the periphery characters in Abby's story like Manny and Owen to Ellies Tommy and Jesse etc...

Of course it was not as good as the original but it would be unrealistic to expect it to be, sequels by their nature are usually a case of diminishing returns but i thoroughly enjoyed the game.

A major aspect of how good a game/movie is for me is just how long it sticks in your mind after you're finished and I feel this will live long in mine.

The death makes no sense though. You can kill Joel off in far other ways than just massively betraying his character from the first. He didn't trust anyone, let alone trust them that quickly. I was annoyed at the scene rather than shocked.

Don't see how you can think you can like Ellie less and less throughout the game. Abby and Joel are essentially doing the same thing. Abby just achieves it earlier in the game in killing Joel and kills almost everyone she comes across that isn't on her side..she also legit wants to kill a pregnant lady. Abby kills most of the people Ellie cares about. Dont see how you like Ellie and not Abby.

Ah, I know why..because the game uses emotional manipulation to make you like Abby and not like Ellie. So, you got duped by really basic emotiona manipulation.go you.

BTW. I don't hate Abby. I think she is an interesting character. I like her gameplay. I just don't like the manipulation, the way Joel died, the ending and the fact Neil wants us to like her and thinks "subverting expectation" automatically means good writing. Its a 7/10

gimli2112

I too don't understand how anyone could not root for Ellie but people get different things from a story. I said before I played the game no matter what happens I couldn't see myself turning away from Joel/Ellie no matter what they did. Without a doubt I was (and will forever be) emotionally controlled by the events of TLOU. A puppet on Naughty Dog's string so to speak.

You can't then criticise people for being influenced by the story in the sequel. The ways ND went about it were crude but they were too in the first one. Ellie jumping into the river saying that Joel will save her, Joel torturing the two cannibals while looking for Ellie, him finally finding her, the god damn giraffes.........

Zero-Cool

al87987 wrote: »

everybody who has survived has done some awful things and will surely be the villain in someone else's story and how they portrayed that is a pretty remarkable achievement.

I think this sums it up perfectly and the brilliance of the story. They took something everyone loved and smashed a golf club off its head to open up the whole apocalyptic world. Fully understand people who are not and don't want to be interested in anything outside Ellie and Joel but I thought it was such a BRAVE :pac: move. Like if the next Uncharted, one of the 10,000 people Nate killed had a loved one that said "I'm gonna get revenge!!" and the next game had that. It sounds crazy and would not work in most games (hasn't worked for a lot of people in this) but for those it did work for, it was genius. I loved every part of this and found myself pulling awful faces during the Ellie and Abby battles. I was obviously leaning towards wanting Ellie to win but the story managed to take me out of the game and just observe what was going on. This might sound like a bad thing as games usually want YOU as the main character but I think it really helped to just take in all sides.

And it wasn't that "If you got that, you were duped", the story was strong enough to support all sides of what was going on.

I watched Angry Joe review this morning but only made it about 5 minutes into it before having to turn it off. Much better arguments from the 'Against' side to TLOU 2 on here.

Saying that, would be great if we could get a poll for 'For' and 'Against' TLOU 2. Not like if you enjoyed it, loved it, hated it, respected it but more along does the very mention of TLOU 2 make you say I'm for it or against it.

BruteStock

gimli2112

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Saying that, would be great if we could get a poll for 'For' and 'Against' TLOU 2. Not like if you enjoyed it, loved it, hated it, respected it but more along does the very mention of TLOU 2 make you say I'm for it or against it.

This is a complex question for me. I like the game overall. There are certain elements I love (museum scene). I've always liked this kind of game and it's done very well here. But
I don't like the story, how it ended and how it made me feel.
Would I have played it knowing what I know now? Probably. Do I wish it had been done differently. Certainly. I would have preferred TLOU2 without Joel and Ellie but then that becomes a totally different game, literally. I genuinely can't answer the question do I wish it had never been made.

Zero-Cool

gimli2112 wrote: »

This is a complex question for me. I like the game overall. There are certain elements I love (museum scene). I've always liked this kind of game and it's done very well here. But
I don't like the story, how it ended and how it made me feel.
Would I have played it knowing what I know now? Probably. Do I wish it had been done differently. Certainly. I would have preferred TLOU2 without Joel and Ellie but then that becomes a totally different game, literally. I genuinely can't answer the question do I wish it had never been made.

Option 1 - For
Option 2 - Against
Option 3 - Gimli

The Raging Bile Duct

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Ah, I know why..because the game uses emotional manipulation to make you like Abby and not like Ellie. So, you got duped by really basic emotiona manipulation.go you.

:rolleyes:

Leroy42

Saw the Angry Joe review, you should have given it more than 5 minutes. He does a pretty fair job, if over the top at times but then he is Angry Joe and not cold tenchical Joe!

Critical Drinker did a review as well and both had the same critique, that the Joel death and Abby story could have been written in a much different, and in their opinion, better way. Now it is easy to come up with a broad idea, but they would find as they developed it that it ran it problems just as any path would.

I do think that it would have been better to start off much earlier playing as Abby. Introduce us back to Ellie and Joel in Jackson, but then go back to Abby at the hospital and her finding her dad. Then play out the dual roles, switching between mainly Abby and then Ellie as Abby moves towards Jackson and we see Ellie in her new life around Jackson trying to deal with the increasing infected threat (migrating horde was mentioned a few times) whilst dealing with the lie that Joel told.

So Joel and Ellie are on patrol, Ellie comes across Abby and brings her back to a lookout. She tells Abby about their previous adventures and Abby works out who Joel is. Replace the theatre scene of Jesse/Tommy with a similar one with Abby and Joel. Abby wounds, but doesn't kill Ellie but kills Joel, and Ellie witnesses it.

Now Ellie has the grief of Joel's death, and the knowledge that it was her that brought Abby into contact with him and by being so open so gave it away. She hates herself and seeks revenge of Abby to rid herself of the sense of guilt and loss. Her first stop is back to the hospital where she finds links between the doc and Abby, she learns that Joel didn't just take her away but brutally killed all he met.

That would start to give us more insight into Abby and her desire to kill Joel. In the meantime Abby has returned to WLF but found that without the drive to get revenge she no longer cares so this fight. Saves Lev and Yara whilst on some mission and then decides to walk away. Wherin Ellie tracks her down to Santa Barbara and boom. Lev kills Dina, Ellie kills Lev, and we are down to the two girls.

But as they are in the midst of fighting each other, they get captured by the Rattlers, tortured, forced to fight off against infected. A chance to escape arrives, but it requires both of them to save each other at different times. It looks like they will survive but as they appear free Ellie cannot let Abby go. Leaving Abby for dead on the beach she takes the boat and heads off. Abby is recaptured by the Rattlers and last scene is Ellie looking back at the beach as Abby screams at being captured.

Fade to black.