The Last of Us 2 - SPOILERS!!!

RasTa · 18-07-2020 4:59pm

Oh and like the first one, this is the best looking game out on the PS4

ThePott · 18-07-2020 5:40pm

Did a bit of a review of the game, found it kinda hard to sum up my thoughts in writing. Found it to be a lot better than most people but definitely has some major problems with the story, the structure in particular. I go into more detail in the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntpxD_pyDQk

RasTa · 18-07-2020 5:51pm

I traded mine into CEX 10mins after I finished it, want to pick up Ghost of Tsushima. Although this is the first game I've finished since The Last Guardian which was a 10/10.

First Last of Us also a 10/10 and this was a 7/10

FrostyJack · 19-07-2020 12:45pm

I finally finished it during the week, the experience was a bit tarnished by stupidly clicking into this thread by accident and seeing Abby lives, so all the rest of the game there was less danger, at one stage I thought Ellie would get her and then Lev would kill her. Overall I really enjoyed i, visuals, motion capture and sound were brilliant. Like most games I saved up all my super weapons, never fired an explosive arrow and minor use of MP5 and explosives which I will make up for in a replay. Like most people I was not happy to jump into Abby's skin, maybe a hour or so to see her side of the story but was so annoying losing all they unlocks and gear to start from scratch, to go through it all again. I understand why they did it but the initial emotion you get seeing Joel's demise, it is neutered by becoming her and becomes a grind until you meet Lev. I am not sure this is a missed opportunity to do a really amazing by the numbers story or the fact of these quirks it made it more interesting. Definitely a must play game, unless you are bigot, which means you will find it very grating, especially if you hate a girl who is muscular and a solider, "why wasn't she a just a receptionist like a good girl". Cant wait for TLOU3 set for release in 2145

heebusjeebus · 19-07-2020 2:35pm

Finished it this morning. Thought the last half dragged but I enjoyed the opportunity of playing as Abby again. I just found redoing the 3 days a slog as I just wanted to see how the showdown between her and Ellie went down.
I mainly enjoyed it. Controls a lot better than the original but I preferred the story they tried to tell in the original.

For the platinum, can I just do the NG+ and make sure I get all remaining collectables or do I have to do chapter select on my save file and then do NG+?

listermint · 20-07-2020 2:53pm

Finished it yesterday, 10/10 for me.

Will add no more. Just excellent game and excellent storyline especially the irony at the end

of connection to Joel via the guitar versus that connection being severed completely on all fronts.

leggo · 20-07-2020 7:07pm

The Last of Us podcast is adding loads of awesome nuggets to this, about how this was seen as a second part of the same story rather than a sequel. For example, the parallels between Ellie and Bill from the first game, who warned Joel not to care about anyone but ended up alone and twisted by his pain. Ellie cared about Joel and the pain his death caused her led to her ending up alone and twisted.

I love how, at the root of it all, this is just a story about grief and how people cope with it (or don’t).

ThePott · 20-07-2020 7:26pm

Yeah I think that was definitely proven with them choosing the title of Part II instead of just 2. I think they do a great job drawing parallels between characters and imagery from the first and second game. I think even the Abby/Lev stuff was quite reminiscent of Joel and Ellie in the first game. There was also moments from Ellie's section of the game that reminded me of David in the first game.

gimli2112 · 21-07-2020 6:42am

ThePott wrote: »

Yeah I think that was definitely proven with them choosing the title of Part II instead of just 2. I think they do a great job drawing parallels between characters and imagery from the first and second game. I think even the Abby/Lev stuff was quite reminiscent of Joel and Ellie in the first game. There was also moments from Ellie's section of the game that reminded me of David in the first game.

Not for me, not even close. I'm coming up to the end of day 3 of Abby's story second time round and hate her even more this playthrough.
It's been a desperate struggle to get this far. If I don't platinum(I'm considering giving up) it at the end it's getting deleted forever anyway. Might play through the first one to wash away the pain of this.

21-07-2020 7:31am

leggo wrote: »

The Last of Us podcast is adding loads of awesome nuggets to this, about how this was seen as a second part of the same story rather than a sequel. For example, the parallels between Ellie and Bill from the first game, who warned Joel not to care about anyone but ended up alone and twisted by his pain. Ellie cared about Joel and the pain his death caused her led to her ending up alone and twisted.

I love how, at the root of it all, this is just a story about grief and how people cope with it (or don’t).

Ironically, the same could be said about some of the people playing the game.

ronano · 21-07-2020 3:03pm

Thinking about the game, I do think it's a fantastic game but have issue with Ellie going back to fight Abby, why go back from her perspective? I felt it was ptsd of Joels death and she needed to end it but it doesn't really tie into Ellie realising why Abby came for Joel in the first place. Anyone got ideas or good article?

Penn · 21-07-2020 3:13pm

ronano wrote: »

Thinking about the game, I do think it's a fantastic game but have issue with Ellie going back to fight Abby, why go back from her perspective? I felt it was ptsd of Joels death and she needed to end it but it doesn't really tie into Ellie realising why Abby came for Joel in the first place. Anyone got ideas or good article?

In my own opinion a large part of it was the fact that Ellie has deep regrets over the fact she and Joel never properly made up, and she never got a chance to forgive him for lying to her. So it goes beyond just wanting to avenge his death, but also the chance at making it up with Joel has been stolen from her and he died without her forgiving him. That's why the events of the dance and their last conversation is kept until then, that's still what's weighing on her mind as much as his actual death.

leggo · 21-07-2020 5:15pm

Penn wrote: »

In my own opinion a large part of it was the fact that Ellie has deep regrets over the fact she and Joel never properly made up, and she never got a chance to forgive him for lying to her. So it goes beyond just wanting to avenge his death, but also the chance at making it up with Joel has been stolen from her and he died without her forgiving him. That's why the events of the dance and their last conversation is kept until then, that's still what's weighing on her mind as much as his actual death.

Exactly this, it’s not even about Abby. You can see it in the way she pities her when she sees her being crucified and wants to have both of them just go their separate ways. But her rage is guilt at not being able to make up with Joel that she projects this onto Abby because it’s too painful when she weighs it up with all the good memories like the museum, even though we know by then that Abby was probably justified in her reasons (even if we don’t like the end result). On some more rational level, Ellie could probably admit that her and Joel had done some stuff in the first game that meant they deserved to be hunted down. But, again, it’s not about Abby. Her anger is at herself and her revenge mission is her doing what she can to make up to Joel.

The one thing everyone involved in the game speaks of is how the two would probably have been able to bond and relate in different circumstances, so that’s something that was a conscious decision.

RGARDINR · 22-07-2020 12:25am

Wonder will there be a third game or a spin off of Abby down the line like the spin off for uncharted. Wouldn't mind seeing the fireflies if she meets up with them.

CastorTroy · 22-07-2020 12:59am

Finished over Saturday, Sunday and today. Very good game. Some parts did annoy me but likely just because I wasn't very good.

Dina and Ellie looking for the gas reminded me a lot of the very similar part of Lost Legacy.

So often I thought it was done, then it kept going

Now just waiting for the cut content to be released as dlc including

Tommy's pov of the 3 days
Jesse's pov
And, of course, Alice's pov

El Gato De Negocios · 01-08-2020 12:45am

Late to it but finished tonight.

Pretty meh about it.

Far too much filler imo, reminded me heavily of Days Gone and the stuff that dragged on for ages.

The first "ending" I felt like fcuking the controller through the tv.

The farm was boring and drawn out.

Really enjoyed the build up to the final confrontation. The ending though, bollocks tbh.

After all that we are expected to swallow that ellie has an epiphany moment?

Not buying it.

Pluses were that it was gorgeous looking throughout and the combat / kills were superbly brutal.

Cut about 10 hours out of it and it would be fantastic, overall though pretty disappointed.

bot43 · 01-08-2020 7:20am

Managed to avoid all spoilers and not read a single review. So this is as unbiased as I can be.

Overall it was a great game. Not without flaw obviously. Initially I HATED the change over to Abbie. Why should I care about the person I was hunting all along? But her story is very legit. Of course she hates Joel and her actions were completely justified. She is a good person despite what Mel says

My biggest issue was the first Abbie Ellie fight. I didn’t want to fight Ellie and hated that Ellie ran away. Ellie doesn’t run away. Then that farm cut. Just glad it didn’t end on that as it would have killed the whole game for me.

I have similar issues with the very end. Abbie doesn’t run away. But she does. Ellie’s epiphany I can get. She saw that Abbie had suffered at the hands of savages. She is haunted by a pretty crappy life. She has had enough death.

Personally I had hoped that an unlikely alliance materialised. In my head after Abbies capture and Ellie’s arrival I thought we would have the reunion as an attempted rape which Ellie’s thwarts due to empathy from her previous experience with Dave in the restaurant in part one.

Gameplay was so much less difficult that part one. Part one is an overall better game.

As mentioned I avoided all spoilers but couldn’t avoid the controversy and the wambulancing about characters and NDs “virtue signalling”. To that I say get a fecking life. If the fact that all your characters weren’t white and straight affects your enjoyment of a game I’d say seek help.

So ya. Loved it. Gonna miss it. But I’ve no doubt that part 3 is going to happen.

El Gato De Negocios · 01-08-2020 7:55am

Was the controversy about Joel dying and Lev?

The Joel piece I loved as it was very much unexpected.

The Lev piece was no more than a passing, "huh" from me when it was revealed.

Stuff like this triggering people really doesn't paint gamers in a very flattering light.

leggo · 01-08-2020 8:13am

I honestly haven’t seen any people giving out about Lev being trans, but I’ve seen loads of counter takes giving out about how disgraceful it is that people are giving out about Lev. Maybe I just missed the initial reaction while I was first playing the game and avoiding spoilers.

ThePott · 01-08-2020 10:50am

I have seen it in some corners of the internet alright but it's not as widespread as some articles would have you believe. It's the usual 'go woke, go broke' brigade. I think the leaks actually might have helped it in that regard, people were almost anticipating the backlash to it so a lot of the moaning about the LGBT representation actually came before the game was available, while the people who actually had an intention of playing the game were avoiding the leaks so the backlash was people who had no interest in the game anyway and wasn't really picked up on by mainstream outlets for fear of spoiling the game.

People were definitely pissed about Joel's death. Which I was fine with but I think some people feel they were mislead by the marketing and expected another Joel/Ellie adventure and that made them angry. People are pissed about playing as Abbie as well, which you can probably again point to people feeling mislead. Threre's definitely problems with the game but people are having sort of knee jerk reactions instead.

SMC92Ian · 01-08-2020 2:06pm

leggo wrote: »

The Last of Us podcast is adding loads of awesome nuggets to this, about how this was seen as a second part of the same story rather than a sequel.

They can say what they want, it's a sequel. :P

Retr0gamer · 01-08-2020 2:27pm

SMC92Ian wrote: »

They can say what they want, it's a sequel. :P

It's like saying they are infected not zombies.

leggo · 01-08-2020 6:13pm

SMC92Ian wrote: »

They can say what they want, it's a sequel. :P

Like I get it if it wasn’t for you and you want to differentiate the two, I wouldn’t try stop someone mentally putting it in a box they felt comfortable with to protect how they felt about the first game.

I see where they’re coming from though. I don’t think they planned the two together, they admit themselves they conceptualised this (and Left Behind) after the first one was made. But they did leave loose ends and threads from the first untold: Ellie’s suspicion at the end of the original, Joel telling Ellie he’d teach her guitar and that becoming a defining part of this game etc. So I can accept it more as a second part than an outright sequel. For me a sequel, in the context I’d assume you mean it, is more when time has passed and they go back to try recreate the magic for the sake of making money. I finished TLOU in 2014 and remember talk of a sequel as soon as I went looking after that, it was always on the table, and I can believe that this story naturally flows from the original (eg the new Star Wars trilogy). I left the original assuming a sequel was on the cards based off the ending, hence me looking to begin with. Even the fact that “Did you kill the doctors?” was a big, deliberate talking point from the original...why include that tiny nuance that most of us didn’t even notice first time around at all?

I can totally accept someone saying they didn’t hit the high benchmark of the first one and having legitimate issues with story or gameplay, or that the risks they took didn’t work, even if I don’t necessarily agree myself. But I’d strongly disagree with implying this is just a lazy attempt to cash-in on the first game. This was made with a lot of thought and TLC, even if it didn’t work for some on an individual level. I’m still thinking about it weeks later and I haven’t had that experience with any other game beyond the original. Even all-timer games I adore like MGS and RE2, I could love them while playing and play them over and over, but they didn’t stay with me after I switched them off like these games have.

SMC92Ian · 01-08-2020 9:01pm

leggo wrote: »

Like I get it if it wasn’t for you and you want to differentiate the two, I wouldn’t try stop someone mentally putting it in a box they felt comfortable with to protect how they felt about the first game.

I see where they’re coming from though. I don’t think they planned the two together, they admit themselves they conceptualised this (and Left Behind) after the first one was made. But they did leave loose ends and threads from the first untold: Ellie’s suspicion at the end of the original, Joel telling Ellie he’d teach her guitar and that becoming a defining part of this game etc. So I can accept it more as a second part than an outright sequel. For me a sequel, in the context I’d assume you mean it, is more when time has passed and they go back to try recreate the magic for the sake of making money. I finished TLOU in 2014 and remember talk of a sequel as soon as I went looking after that, it was always on the table, and I can believe that this story naturally flows from the original (eg the new Star Wars trilogy). I left the original assuming a sequel was on the cards based off the ending, hence me looking to begin with. Even the fact that “Did you kill the doctors?” was a big, deliberate talking point from the original...why include that tiny nuance that most of us didn’t even notice first time around at all?

I can totally accept someone saying they didn’t hit the high benchmark of the first one and having legitimate issues with story or gameplay, or that the risks they took didn’t work, even if I don’t necessarily agree myself. But I’d strongly disagree with implying this is just a lazy attempt to cash-in on the first game. This was made with a lot of thought and TLC, even if it didn’t work for some on an individual level. I’m still thinking about it weeks later and I haven’t had that experience with any other game beyond the original. Even all-timer games I adore like MGS and RE2, I could love them while playing and play them over and over, but they didn’t stay with me after I switched them off like these games have.

What's with the mental essay? I didn't say anything about them game. Only that it is a sequel. The first game was written as only supposed to be 1 game, 1 story.

Funny you mention SW as the newer trilogy literally started where the second ended. So is that just a part 2 and not a sequel?

I've never once seen anyone question killing the doctor until around a year when all this TLOU2 was floating around, in 1 you had no choice, you couldn't not kill him.

johnny_ultimate · 01-08-2020 9:19pm

It’s a sequel. It is by any standard definition of the word ‘sequel’ a sequel.

The original game wasn’t planned as two parts, and even if it was it would still be a sequel. The Two Towers is a sequel to The Fellowship of the Ring.

I thought the game was decent, but honestly the creators need to stop pretending their wildly expensive shooty zombie game is some piece of unique high video game art that’s too worthy for common description. It’s a ****ing sequel.

leggo · 01-08-2020 9:47pm

SMC92Ian wrote: »

What's with the mental essay? I didn't say anything about them game. Only that it is a sequel. The first game was written as only supposed to be 1 game, 1 story.

Funny you mention SW as the newer trilogy literally started where the second ended. So is that just a part 2 and not a sequel?

I've never once seen anyone question killing the doctor until around a year when all this TLOU2 was floating around, in 1 you had no choice, you couldn't not kill him.

Why are you getting defensive? Go ‘way with that ‘mental essay’ nonsense. You clicked on boards.ie, went specifically to the video game message board, read a post about 500 posts deep into a discussion, quoted it with a pedantic point arguing whether something is ‘part 2’ or a sequel, and got a response from the person you chose to address yourself. You’re too deep to start acting above this discussion pal, sorry. :pac: I didn’t even argue with you, the first line of the ‘essay’ was me saying I respect how people choose to see it themselves. So if you’re on here trying to have a row to work through some stuff, leave me out of that thanks.

If you didn’t see people discussing whether you killed the doctors or not, that’s irrelevant. You had to kill the main doctor (Abby’s dad) but a big talking point of the first game was whether or not you killed all the doctors, because you didn’t need to. Joel did tell Ellie he’d teach her how to play guitar, then it was never mentioned again. The ending was left ambiguous because it was hinted but not confirmed that Ellie didn’t actually believe Joel’s version of events. These all happened and were loose ends they chose not to wrap up. So yeah I believe they probably had a Part 2 in mind (same way that the menu screen at the end of Part 2 is in Catalina and we don’t know where Ellie is going, leaving it open for another game). If you want to get super pedantic and believe these are all coincidences, that’s your right, but I’ve really no interest in continuing this super niche debate about nothing you’ve now made it weirdly confrontational, I just enjoy talking about TLOU2...

ThePott · 02-08-2020 1:12am

I think the truth is in the middle with all of this.
Was a sequel always likely?
Yes, it's pretty rare for a platform exclusive to not become a series.
Did they always plan for a sequel?
They probably had thoughts of where the story would go next. Every creative team thinks of what a sequel would be even if they know they'll never make another one. Did they leave 'threads' there to continue if they did make another. Possibly, it's not uncommon. Ellie eventually finding out she was lied too was always something that could be explored later as was the repurcussions of Joel's actions. A lot of the things mentioned though can easily just have been there with no intention of a sequel but that they decided to pick up on when they went on to make a sequel. Naughty Dog have always questioned whether you were truly the good guy considering the actions you've done throughout the game, it's in the Uncharted series too. I always took the guitar line in the original to be more a sign that Joel was more willing to accept that there could be a better future and offering some optimism to Ellie and reassurance to himself.
Why did they call it a second part instead of a sequel?
The first game had a pretty conclusive story and was considered a masterpiece on the level not many games are. They possibly didn't want to call it a sequel as it would cheapen the first game in retrospect. It felt like quite a contained story so cynics may have seen sequelising it as a cashgrab. I do think definining something as a sequel or second part is pretty arbitrary. Then again it explores some pretty different themes and ideas from a story perspective, so I can see justification for them not calling it a straight-up sequel. I do think their intention for it to be viewed as a second part though is pretty clear from the title even if there is a fine line (if there's one at all) between a second part and sequel. Especially when you're dealing with two games that were likely not fully conceived at the same time.

I enjoyed the game either way so if they decide to do a Part 3 and call it a sequel or a third part of a story I wouldn't mind either way as long as it delivers like I feel these have.

SMC92Ian · 02-08-2020 2:44am

leggo wrote: »

Why are you getting defensive? Go ‘way with that ‘mental essay’ nonsense. You clicked on boards.ie, went specifically to the video game message board, read a post about 500 posts deep into a discussion, quoted it with a pedantic point arguing whether something is ‘part 2’ or a sequel, and got a response from the person you chose to address yourself. You’re too deep to start acting above this discussion pal, sorry. :pac: I didn’t even argue with you, the first line of the ‘essay’ was me saying I respect how people choose to see it themselves. So if you’re on here trying to have a row to work through some stuff, leave me out of that thanks.

If you didn’t see people discussing whether you killed the doctors or not, that’s irrelevant. You had to kill the main doctor (Abby’s dad) but a big talking point of the first game was whether or not you killed all the doctors, because you didn’t need to. Joel did tell Ellie he’d teach her how to play guitar, then it was never mentioned again. The ending was left ambiguous because it was hinted but not confirmed that Ellie didn’t actually believe Joel’s version of events. These all happened and were loose ends they chose not to wrap up. So yeah I believe they probably had a Part 2 in mind (same way that the menu screen at the end of Part 2 is in Catalina and we don’t know where Ellie is going, leaving it open for another game). If you want to get super pedantic and believe these are all coincidences, that’s your right, but I’ve really no interest in continuing this super niche debate about nothing you’ve now made it weirdly confrontational, I just enjoy talking about TLOU2...

Defensive? People on the net read too much into things. I didn't read all that, just a bit, I clicked a bookmark, brought me here. I like both games but people are acting like these games are the second coming of christ, no they're just brilliant games, actually no the gameplay is a bit bland and janky, 2 has terrible aim mechanics and went on way to long but I love the characters and passion the cast put in. It's not OMFG and is a sequel. Neil has no intention of making a 2nd game, watch him talk to Troy.

leggo · 02-08-2020 7:30am

I really don’t understand how people are getting triggered by that tbh. It’s such a tiny, insignificant detail that you can easily just choose to see your own way and not a single person on the planet is trying to take that away from you. I get that that’s what happens on the Internet but it doesn’t make it any less weird when it does.

I get exactly what they’re saying: some sequels are brand new stories just involving most of the same characters, some are direct continuations of the first story dealing with consequences and themes left open in that. They’re saying that it’s the latter, which it clearly is. But it’s a tiny perception thing that, again, you can choose to frame however you like in your own head and it changes nothing about either of the games.

For example, I see Harry Potter all as one story spread over different books/movies, I see Star Wars Episodes 1-6 as one story (and 7-9 as a separate one), and I see this as one story spread over two games. That’s me though, you’re allowed see any of the above your own way, and arguing about that is like arguing when you read a book that the way you imagine a character is ‘right’ and the way someone else does is ‘wrong’.

02-08-2020 7:57am

It's literally called Part Two

Not The Last of Us 2. The name in this thread is wrong to note

Yes it's a sequel but from day one it was indicated as a continuation of the first games story

He has a point about the game he made

johnny_ultimate · 02-08-2020 11:17am

Putting the word ‘part’ into the title doesn’t absolve it from being a sequel. Honestly, a lot of this to me just rings as Druckmann and co being pretentious - and I absolutely HATE using the word pretentious, but can’t think of a more appropriate description in this case. They’re trying to insist the game is ‘better’ and ‘more worthy’ than a ‘mere’ sequel.

Lots and lots of sequels directly continue and expand on the narrative and themes of their predecessor - even widely acclaimed ones such as The Godfather Part 2 (which I’d imagine most creators who use Part 2 are trying to harken back to), Toy Story 2, Before Sunset etc... The Last of Us is nowhere near unique in this regard: although in a medium so infatuated with reboots, follow-ups, spin-offs... this is perhaps a more traditional and straightforward sequel than we often get.

It’s not a matter of being ‘triggered’ or argumentative: in this case, the very dictionary definition of a sequel is 100% applicable to TLOU2. And while I completely respect artists’ right to say and believe what they want about their own work, I equally respect people’s right to call out the artists’ comments as being horse**** when they clearly are talking absolute horse**** :pac:

leggo · 02-08-2020 11:53am

But why do you care? Why if someone considers it all to be the one story told in two parts does it bother you to the point that you need to then argue with and try ‘prove’ that the way you perceive a story is the ‘correct’ way?

02-08-2020 12:07pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Putting the word ‘part’ into the title doesn’t absolve it from being a sequel. Honestly, a lot of this to me just rings as Druckmann and co being pretentious - and I absolutely HATE using the word pretentious, but can’t think of a more appropriate description in this case. They’re trying to insist the game is ‘better’ and ‘more worthy’ than a ‘mere’ sequel.

Lots and lots of sequels directly continue and expand on the narrative and themes of their predecessor - even widely acclaimed ones such as The Godfather Part 2 (which I’d imagine most creators who use Part 2 are trying to harken back to), Toy Story 2, Before Sunset etc... The Last of Us is nowhere near unique in this regard: although in a medium so infatuated with reboots, follow-ups, spin-offs... this is perhaps a more traditional and straightforward sequel than we often get.

It’s not a matter of being ‘triggered’ or argumentative: in this case, the very dictionary definition of a sequel is 100% applicable to TLOU2. And while I completely respect artists’ right to say and believe what they want about their own work, I equally respect people’s right to call out the artists’ comments as being horse**** when they clearly are talking absolute horse**** :pac:

Never said it did

johnny_ultimate · 02-08-2020 12:15pm

leggo wrote: »

But why do you care? Why if someone considers it all to be the one story told in two parts does it bother you to the point that you need to then argue with and try ‘prove’ that the way you perceive a story is the ‘correct’ way?

Not going to lose any sleep over it, I can tell you that

I do feel words and their meaning matter, and a developer suggesting the sequel they made is not a sequel just seems utterly preposterous and rather silly to me.

SMC92Ian · 02-08-2020 6:13pm

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Neil Druckmann's insistence on calling it "part 2" is a ploy to legitimise plot developments like Joel's death - which was a fairly obvious ass-pull in order to justify a sequel. Still a good game regardless but he should just own it as a sequel.

Even before 2 was announced I knew Joel was dying, it was obvious.

Penn · 02-08-2020 6:45pm

I don't think there was any real plan as such for a sequel. Obviously if the first game was successful they would, but I don't think they knew what the story would be or what direction it would take until long after the first game was finished. There were no setups for a sequel. The ending of the first game was completely unambiguous. Joel lied to Ellie, and Ellie didn't fully believe him. That was the ending, that was the whole point of the ending. It was about how all they have is each other, flaws and all. After everything they went through, neither of them wants to lose the other regardless of the fact they're both lying to each other. I've also seen it suggested here that Joel saying he'd teach Ellie to play guitar was an unresolved issue. It's not, it's just something that was said in passing, that they used as a plot point in a sequel.

The first game was a whole. It was complete. Joel killed the doctor in the first game, and that's all the doctor was. It was only when they decided to do a sequel that they made that doctor be an important figure to someone else (as opposed to any of the multitude of other people Joel/Ellie killed).

They can call it The Last Of Us 2, or The Last Of Us Part 2 or whatever. But they're not telling this one big overarching story over multiple games. They're telling a story in one game, then making up a continuation of that story in the next game, and they'll probably make another game which will also continue the story.

Zero-Cool · 02-08-2020 8:06pm

The sequel vs part 2 argument is some of the biggest Bolloxology I've seen on tlou 2 arguments.

Was either in the podcast or interview, Neil said it was after TLOU One Night Live (which was in 2014, 1 year after original release) that he approached Ashley with the rough story for 2, Ellie gets revenge for Joel's death. Lots would change like Ellie originally killed Abby and Abby's dad was a victim of Joel the hunter (i really like that take). But anyway, the idea for the sequel was being kicked around in 2014 as far as any actors knew.

SMC92Ian · 02-08-2020 10:16pm

Zero-Cool wrote: »

The sequel vs part 2 argument is some of the biggest Bolloxology I've seen on tlou 2 arguments.

Was either in the podcast or interview, Neil said it was after TLOU One Night Live (which was in 2014, 1 year after original release) that he approached Ashley with the rough story for 2, Ellie gets revenge for Joel's death. Lots would change like Ellie originally killed Abby and Abby's dad was a victim of Joel the hunter (i really like that take). But anyway, the idea for the sequel was being kicked around in 2014 as far as any actors knew.

He didn't approach Ashley?, he approached Troy with a rough idea of all the plot points, then in another interview Neil went back on himself saying what he told Troy was mostly bollocks that never happened. Can't even believe the director haha.

Underground · 04-08-2020 10:44pm

For anyone interested, Irish youtuber Matthewmatosis uploaded a review of this which I enjoyed . As far as YouTube critics go I'd say he's among the best, would get far more out of his videos than an Angry Joe or Yongyea review.

Apologies, on the phone so can't link directly.

https://youtu.be/xa9oEroGDQc

Retr0gamer · 04-08-2020 10:45pm

Thanks his stuff is always quality.

The Raging Bile Duct · 04-08-2020 10:54pm

I don't know how anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size could watch that Angry Joe scutter.

Greyfox · 05-08-2020 1:48am

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

I don't know how anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size could watch that Angry Joe scutter.

Completely disagree, he's very entertaining and one of the best reviewers on youtube. As for TLOU2 it's a solid 8/10 for me. At first it felt wrong playing as Abbey but her side of the story ended up been well told. Having her dad been the person you had to kill in the original and letting us get to know Abbeys friends was brilliant. Although they dragged it out a bit it was interesting knowing that Abey will eventually find Owen dead. It was never going to land perfectly as Ellie and Joel are characters you care deeply about and although brave storytelling there's a reason why revenge stories end with the goodie killing the baddie.

On a side note since the original Resident Evil I always enjoy reading diarys/letters and that letter in the Aquarium really stands out, the one with a Dad learning his kids are never coming back due to him been a coward and if they come back they hope he's not in his chair.

The Raging Bile Duct · 05-08-2020 7:55am

Greyfox wrote: »

Completely disagree, he's very entertaining and one of the best reviewers on youtube. As for TLOU2 it's a solid 8/10 for me.

I'd find a highly virulent dose of diarrhea more entertaining than that lad.

Penn · 05-08-2020 8:39am

I think he can be okay when talking (not shouting) about games. But the "skits" and him just yelling and ranting... not worth trudging through his reviews. But ultimately that's his schtick.

The Raging Bile Duct · 05-08-2020 3:32pm

Article discussing why we should return to black and white morality games using the Last of Us 2 and Bioshock Infinite as a springboard for its argument and throwing in some black lives matter for relevance. It's a dumpster fire of an article imo.

https://www.polygon.com/2020/8/3/21352437/games-morality-last-of-of-us-bioshock-good-bad

Retr0gamer · 05-08-2020 3:39pm

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Article discussing why we should return to black and white morality games using the Last of Us 2 and Bioshock Infinite as a springboard for its argument and throwing in some black lives matter for relevance. It's a dumpster fire of an article imo.

https://www.polygon.com/2020/8/3/21352437/games-morality-last-of-of-us-bioshock-good-bad

I thought it would be a dumpster fire until I read it. Rather than say return to black and white morality I get the author is saying that everything doesn't have to be morally grey. There's nothing wrong with some black and white morality when it fits. Thought it was a well researched and written article and he is dead on about the likes of Last of US 2 and especially Bioshock Infinite. I mean there's no morally grey about racism, it's just out and out bad and Bioshock Infinite comes across as really head scratchingly stupid because of it. Last of Us 2 in it's weaker moments is trying way too hard to be morally grey and those moments come across as forced and artificial.

The Raging Bile Duct · 05-08-2020 4:06pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I thought it would be a dumpster fire until I read it. Rather than say return to black and white morality I get the author is saying that everything doesn't have to be morally grey. There's nothing wrong with some black and white morality when it fits. Thought it was a well researched and written article and he is dead on about the likes of Last of US 2 and especially Bioshock Infinite. I mean there's no morally grey about racism, it's just out and out bad and Bioshock Infinite comes across as really head scratchingly stupid because of it. Last of Us 2 in it's weaker moments is trying way too hard to be morally grey and those moments come across as forced and artificial.

But you can have a character with noble aspirations, or considered a force a force for good, be corrupted by power - Aung San Suu Kyi springs to mind in the real world.

There's grey morality everywhere in life. Racism is completely wrong but what about what about the person raised in a racist family who has been completely indoctrinated and never had a chance to learn a different point of view?

Retr0gamer · 05-08-2020 4:14pm

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

But you can have a character with noble aspirations, or considered a force a force for good, be corrupted by power - Aung San Suu Kyi springs to mind in the real world.

There's grey morality everywhere in life. Racism is completely wrong but what about what about the person raised in a racist family who has been completely indoctrinated and never had a chance to learn a different point of view?

Yes you can have that, but that has nothing to do with Bioshock Inifinte, it isn't even that clever about it. It comes across as ridiculous and even more damning is the DLC's ridiculous attempt to retcon it which falls flat on its face. It's like Ken Levine knew he messed up but instead of owning it and admitting to it and addressing it he tries to retcon it in a 'I had this planned all along!' kind of way which just ended up eyerollingly bad.

Again, read the article. The headline is admittedly misleading. It's no saying get rid of morally grey story plot points, it's more saying everything doesn't have to be morally grey. Black and white morality can be good and just as intellectually stimulating as well. A lot of developers are falling over themselves to make everything morally grey when they would be better off in some cases to just have a bit of black and white in their games.

The Raging Bile Duct · 05-08-2020 4:32pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes you can have that, but that has nothing to do with Bioshock Inifinte, it isn't even that clever about it. It comes across as ridiculous and even more damning is the DLC's ridiculous attempt to retcon it which falls flat on its face. It's like Ken Levine knew he messed up but instead of owning it and admitting to it and addressing it he tries to retcon it in a 'I had this planned all along!' kind of way which just ended up eyerollingly bad.

Again, read the article. The headline is admittedly misleading. It's no saying get rid of morally grey story plot points, it's more saying everything doesn't have to be morally grey. Black and white morality can be good and just as intellectually stimulating as well. A lot of developers are falling over themselves to make everything morally grey when they would be better off in some cases to just have a bit of black and white in their games.

I have read the article.

What’s also perfidious is the implication in gray stories that “goodness” is just a hair’s difference away from “badness,” when it’s a perspective steeped in privilege: The oppressor is as multifaceted as the oppressed, and the hero as capable of evil-doings as the villain.

This perspective allows even the most racist or authoritarian among us to argue that their beliefs are just that — beliefs they are free to pursue, and should be free to do so, instead of the reality of plain ol’ boring and evil white supremacy or fascism. Video games love to blend the good and the bad themselves until they become a gray goo, eventually and sometimes relentlessly symbolically arguing that all lives matter.

The above is just plain poo in my opinion. The authoritarian and the racist among us are going to always argue that their viewpoints are just. They were doing it long before some video games introduced the notion of moral ambiguity into their stories. As for the all lives matter part at the end... my eyes couldn't roll back in my head enough.

Retr0gamer · 05-08-2020 4:58pm

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

The authoritarian and the racist among us are going to always argue that their viewpoints are just.

But that's the whole point. Arguing that these people have their own side is just wrong and gives them a platform and legitimacy when there should be no argument. They're just plain wrong and evil.

It's the same argument they use that has them arguing that their racist comments should be heard because of freedom of speech when freedom of speech means we can also choose not to give these voices a platform because they are wrong and will do harm if they get out there.

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

As for the all lives matter part at the end... my eyes couldn't roll back in my head enough.

Thought the author was on the ball with that comment. It's pretty much the racists trying to de-legitimise and weaken the BLM movement by throwing out morally grey whataboutery shade that actually has nothing to do with the BLM movement.

The Last of Us 2 - SPOILERS!!!

Comments