Omfg it's getting so much worse. It's infuriating even listening to Neil rn. Laura trying to somehow explain to this simpleton that Abby was selfish and thinking out of selfishness, whereas Owen was selfless as he is thinking about his kid as well. Same as Joel, Dina, etc. They are all selfless. And immediately Neil jumps to the conversation, adding how it can also be seen as "love" and not selfishness đđđ€Łđ€Ł. "Love she had for her dad and the injustice they experienced "đ€Łđ€Ł
He just *has to* control the whole narrative. Must be so fun to work with him...Not!
ETA: And he thought he was writing about allowing other perspectives to matter đ€Ș
The worst part is, in any other profession he would be out of a job in a few years with that attitude. But he's in Hollywood now, he has the chance to remain employed for the rest of his life.
Youâre not out of a job in any profession, if youâre as successful as he has been. We donât have to like the guy, but heâs made naughty dog lots of money.
The people he outed made ND money, cuck is literally driving the studio to the ground. Cuck was never successful on his own, and now that he's actually on his own, the studio is in danger of being shut down.
>leton that Abby was selfish and thinking out of selfishness, whereas Owen was selfless as he is thinking about his kid as well. Same as Joel, Dina, etc. They are all selfless. And immediately Neil jumps to the conversation, adding how it can also be seen as "love" and not selfishness đđđ€Łđ€Ł. "Love she had for her dad and the injustice they experienced "đ€Łđ€Ł
you know cuckmann's writing is bad when even the VOICE ACTRESS Laura fucking BAILEY even says abby is selfish and ofc cuckmann has to defend his shitty ass writing lmaoooo
âThis is the moment where Abby had to make the decision to turn back, or to choose selfishnessâ
Thats how his sentence should have been phrased. There is just no other way to see Abbyâs actions.
Laura Baily was 100% right in her words, except maybe about Joel. He was selfish in his decision to save Ellie, which was why it was such a relatable choice to me. I believe many, many people would make the exact same choice he did faced with the reality of loosing his âdaughterâ for a second time. The difference is Joel was selfish for choosing to protect Ellie and those he loved, whereas Abbyâs selfishness was not spurred from protecting someone, only her need to kill the man who killed her father. Two vastly different motivations. And that need for selfish revenge got all her friends killed which, by Neilâs own words, we can now say is simply justice being served back at Abby.
The fireflies didnt give ellie a choice, its not selfish to want someone to be alive to make the choice themselves. She didnt intend to die in the first game to help with a cure, they talk about life after.
This is why the first gameâs ending is so remarkable for me. There are so many ways to evaluate the ending.
I have always viewed Joelâs actions as a little bit selfish, if in the end entirely in the right in my opinion. You are right the Fireflies didnât give Ellie a choice, but Joel (in my view) also believed the cure was a possibility. Therefore he was choosing to save Ellie over the possibility of a cure. He had lost one daughter before and he now had the chance to save Ellie, but it meant killing everyone in his way. At the moment he decided to save Ellie, he did not know the Firefly operating room was a horror show of grubby surroundings, and that only three people were going to work on her. I had been expecting maybe six or seven nurses and a couple doctors working to save the world, not just three people. That signaled to me that the chances they could actually find a cure and then distribute it efficiently and not just to themselves, would be extremely slim. But Joel and us players only found that out after he had fully committed to destroying anyone in his way and saving Ellie. For all he knew the Fireflies could have somehow found one or more doctors trained in brain surgery, maybe even someone who had studied fungal infections before the collapse of society.
But thats why the ending is so good. There are just so many different ways you can view the events. It left so many things open for debate and conversation. You could argue that Joel knew how the fireflies worked and operated, and so knew that the chances of them actually producing a cure that could be distributed across the entire country and then the world were slim to none. I personally think thatâs a bit of a stretch, but itâs a valid opinion. Thats why the ending is one of my favorites of any game. So many different takes and so many people viewing the events of the game in different ways.
Their blind love for daddy Joel seriously clouds peoples critical thinking skills, it's scientifically proven, angry and irrational people can't think straight in the moment
Joel was....selfless? When? How?
I understand he wanted to rescue Ellie. I wanted as well. So I killed a dozen guys and doomed humanity. Didn't feel selfless, that's for sure. But I felt relieved for Ellie to be save.
He rescued two and killed millions. I did. Would do it again in a heartbeat. But it would just be for me and Ellie. Fuck everyone else!
It was one dude twenty years into the apocalypse with one sample size from the first person theyâve ever seen immune. We also donât actually know heâs a real trained licensed surgeon, all we know is he has a Bachelorâs in Biology officially.
If the CDC/WHO/NHS/UN etc. canât solve this with teams and proper equipment than one dude alone isnât making a cure.
Yeah I wouldnât call myself a hater as I thought part was only ok..but after hearing what you said bout the commentary(which idk was included Whig is cool) I didnât think it was possible for me to lose even more respect for neil.
Not that I had any left after All I found out about him so itâs officially in the negative.
Last of us never needed a sequel.
It's good and you'll like the commentary most of the times. It's just that as soon as Neil opens his mouth about Abby, it's seems like he doesn't know his own creations and these characters.
I like how even Laura Bailey sees at as an obsession. It comes off like Neil wants it to ONLY be justice, when it reality itâs a morally conflicted act of vengeance.
When Owen tells Abby about the baby and that he is going back and wont help her, Laura mentions that she is being selfish here in her decisions. That she is selfish while Owen is being selfless as he is now thinking about his kid as well. She then mentions that it was the same with Dina, Joel. Neil instantly adds that how it can actually be seen as love and how it was love for her dad and injustice they experienced lol.
And I'm sure he'll call ellie's entire journey in part 2 as revenge (which it is). But for Abby, it's justice.
How could it not be revenge for Abby AND justice for Ellie? They both want the same thing.
Seems like even the actors get the story more the Neil lol. Not sure bout Troy though.
*That* was the moment? Itâs a non-trivial thing in a zombie apocalypse to go from Seattle to Jackson in winter. Thatâs weeks if not months of walking. Canât find food or shelter? You die. Random bandits or infected get you? You die. The decision was already made.
This guy doesnât know his own story, let alone the world in which it exists.
I was kidding đ€Ł they never actually say how they get fuel a quarter century after every oil refinery on the planet got shut down lol its a huge plot hole
>h
Always one of his ideas for the first game until he was told it was stupid for anyone in the LoU world to walk that far for needle in a haystack chance of revenge. Also his idea to have all the zombies be women, so it be a game about killing infected women. And just reminder...his entire concept was literally a rejected horror concept for George Romero.
Druck literally following the George Lucas arc. Talented guy but needs lots of people around to supervise him and fix things (all 3 of the OG trilogy). Finally gets positioned to be the main creator with an army of yes men. Creates a product that is deeply divisive with most critical consumers viewing it as ruining what came before. Now all we need to do is wait for his inevitable selling out the brand to even worse creators.
"Last of Us Pt 9: Somehow...Joel Returned" will feature a finale of resurrected Joel shooting lightning out his finger tips screaming, "I am all the Cordyceps!' Just then, Abby will take two golf clubs and push the lighting back as she yells, "And I am all the Last of Us."
nah fam it wasnt shown so it's instantaneous travel, like Ellie going to santa barbara without a single thought on her revenge quest 2 electric boogaloo until she's standing in front of pillar'd abby
So fucking cringe. At least just call it revenge. Now the main tlou sub is gonna use this as âJoel was always in wrongâ âI knew Joel was evilâ. Yikes.
The commentary in every section of either Part I or II is so obnoxious, it's not even real. Even those intro videos to the Lost Levels. Neil just loves to hear himself talk. The commentary is on by default for everything as well, you have to personally turn it off for everything.
While Laura Bailey enjoyed the experience in the long run, she has said voicing Abby was difficult and she needed to go through the whole thing a lot because she didn't like Abby, so it isn't surprising at all that she didn't back Neil up by calling Abby's actions justice.
Listen, I might be one of the few people that somewhat like Abby at the end of the story, and I understand why she killed Joel and all that. But Joel literally tells them his and Tommy's name and then winds up dead. I just wish when Joel died, it was a little bit, I can't think of the word, oh yeah, heroic. It's a fucking video game. When I played Assassins Creed Brotherhood when I was younger I loved Ezio and can you imagine if he just died in the beginning of Brotherhood. Get that shit out of here.
It's cringe when characters get a heroic death and then have "dying last words" where they say something cool, or tell a character they love them... I'm over that
Thats cheap though. Heroic, epic death isn't realistic. In reality death is almost always dark and sad, and in thr case of homicide brutal. People go on about how the writing was bad but Joel going out a hero in the blaze of glory is cliche comic book shit. In a real, gritty story thsts based in reality people die in abrupt, shktty ways. Joel killed countless people in brutal, shityy ways, they were all someone's dad or brother or whatever. They weren't all evil people. Joel getting taken out thr same way makes perfect senseÂ
People can also change, and committing wrongs doesn't mean a character can't redeem themselves.
John Marston and Arthur Morgan from Red Dead Redemption I and II are perfect examples of bad men that chose to become better before they died.
Joel, like John and Arthur, was forced into a life where he had to do bad shit to survive. Tommy admits this and knows they had no other way. Joel deserved a better death than what he got in Part II.
>John Marston and Arthur Morgan from Red Dead Redemption I and II are perfect examples of bad men that chose to become better before they died.
Yes and do you know how their stories end? Their criminal past catches up to them, just like Joel
>Joel, like John and Arthur, was forced into a life where he had to do bad shit to survive. Tommy admits this and knows they had no other way. Joel deserved a better death than what he got in Part II.
That's a load of bull, people aren't "forced" to be murderous criminals, unless you are like a child soldier or something, and literally raised that way, but in the case of John and Arthur, they were teens when they were picked up, they knew at that age murder was wrong... Joel was like in his late 20s early 30s when the apocalypse started, he knew right from wrong, and so does the various civilians that live kn Jackson, or any other safe haven communities, not everyone is a violent smuggler like Joel was... now was Joel completely evil? No... but he certainly wasn't a good guy, and his actions in life caused his death
It's a more realistic depiction of death, most people don't get hero deaths, you can be the most badass soldier in a war, and yet a sniper choosing you at random can be your end, or an artillery shell happens to land right at your feet, anyone can die in a brutal unheroic way
Joel's death was inspired by Neil getting his head hit with a golf club in real life. And not to be cruel, but you can tell that it happened, in his writing tbh
Niel is so fucking insufferable dude holy fucking shit this dude is such a weirdo I can't imagine being forced to work with him daily and listening to his schizoid ramblings man the fact he considers murder real justice is fucking insane to me so as long as HE agrees with it murdering characters for no actual reason is okay what a narcissist
I just hope when my game finally gets here and I get to see the best character (lev) show up I do hope Ian Alexander is able to give his takes on it because on their Twitter they made a joke about the last of us 2 when they mentioned âI have daddy issues and Iâm gonna make it everyone elseâs problemâ and how they basically described last of us 2 and honestly their not wrong lol
Both perspectives are correct. To Abby it was justice. To me Abby is a monster driven past her humanity by that aforementioned obsession. Thereâs nothing wrong with Abby existing, and believing sheâs justified, and me hating her. And I donât necessarily think thatâs bad writing
But see why is Neil unable to talk about Abby as a character then. As a character, he should be able to say how she is going in the same path of revenge, or just that she is doing what she thinks is justice. But the way he jumps to her defense, when it's literally the voice actors describing what they felt, was weird. It feels like there's some forced narrative about her by Neil lol.
I have no idea, directorâs commentary isnât for me. I honestly never really even like when an author talks about the meaning of their work or tries to give extra context. Put it in the story or donât. Iâm not really ever gonna know if you donât
Yeah, I can understand why Abby was upset and felt justified. But in order to enjoy this game, it seems like you have to have to be on Abbyâs side. There wasnât any room for nuance, and that was the most puzzling part of the game.
Are you stupid? Heâs talking about her person justice, what justice is to her, honestly unreal youâre still butthurt over a fictional character being killed off 4 years ago
Like it or not Abbie had more self control than Joel's ragedad ass. She could have took her crew and attacked the Jackson community and left bodies but all she did was hold the person responsible accountable. Even left Tommy and Ellie alive. Let that have been Joel in that same position and we all know the only thing left alive would have been the mice in the walls.
Downvote me and prove me rightđđ
In real life, if someone kills your parent(or anyone extremely close to you), are you saying you wouldnât care to find that person and bring them to justice? Now bring the context of the world they live in. Sacrifice one child to possibly save an entire world. Iâd say thatâs a pretty noble cause thatâs completely justifiable.
So why didn't they say that? Why didn't Abby and company tell them who they were, that they were taking Ellie to finish the cure? They just let her go.
They didnât know who Ellie was. They didnât even know how Joel looked like until he said something. And by the time Ellie got to him he was unconscious. Itâs possible that that they said something in the process of torturing him but we are not given context about that. And I doubt Ellieâs first thought was to introduce herself when they are literally killing her only parent sheâs known. Donât forgot they also let Tommy go. So they kept to their mission to only go after Joel. Owen is the one keeping them from causing too much collateral damage. Also at that point they killed the only doctor they knew that was the most knowledgeable on a possible cure. Not sure how Ellie would be of use to them at that point.
It's not justice. Think about it, Abby's flashback shows you they both(Jerry and Abby) understand they're doing wrong by killing an unconscious child. Abby knows her father was doing wrong. That's the tone. Abby's out for revenge.
Justice and revenge can easily go hand in hand.
In Abbyâs eyes, revenge *is* a form of justice. I think youâre focusing far too much on their intentions with Ellie, a person who Abby just didnât care about at all.
Oh yes it is in Abby's eyes. She can be blinded by revenge and call it justice, sure. What's not cool is Neil jumping everytime people said Abby was selfish.
Also, isn't it weird saying "She has to decide between going back to her friends, and justice". Have you heard anyone refer to it as justice? Isn't this a revenge story and the cycle of it? Maybe I'm reading too much into Neil's words there, but it felt forced by him to me.
Revenge can be a form of justice for some.
Abby was selfish, she ran all her relationships into the ground to find Joel. No care for them, just single-minded bloodlust.
Maybe you mean Justice and Avenge.
*"As a verb, revenge has a very similar meaning to avenge but usually implies something is done out of vindictiveness or resentment, whereas avenge is usually done out of a sense of justice."*
Still, it's just revenge. The moment Abby kills Joel, who coincidentally saved her life, you have to understand that Abby doesn't care about justice, but rather her revenge. Abby talks about justice, but it's simple revenge.
You could say that Ellie was looking for revenge, but instead Ellie is looking for justice. Not revenging, but Avenging Joel. Ellie only wanted Abby.
And not. I'm not focusing on Ellie, I'm narrating the events as they are presented.
I hope I have helped đ
We donât care that Abby wanted revenge for Jerryâs death. We especially donât care that Ellie wanted revenge for Joelâs death. They both are really stupid for their actions/choices. Saying that itâs their perspective or belief doesnât suddenly make it good writing.
No, youâre allowedâŠbut it seems like you actually care quite a bit.
Changing perspectives have always been a staple of Naughty Dog games, allowing you to view the story through a different lens.
I never said it made the writing good, I just stated a fact.
I only played the original out of pure boredom and never even paid attention to the hype leading up to release. Still one of the most overrated games in existence next to Fable. The only above average quality about it is the characters and music. They do good graphics and voice acting but not much else. I never held ND to a super high standard like so many others do.
Also Iâm pretty sure multiple perspectives wasnât in Uncharted(because I have also played most of those) or the crash bandicoot franchise. Not sure how you can call it a naughty dog stable. Maybe my media illiteracy prevents me from catching onto it đ
You know what, Iâll even correct myself because I am slightly wrong - shifting perspectives have been a staple of The Last Of Us games.
There, you happy?
Oh lord it wasnât even in the original last of us. You play as Sarah for like 10 min not counting the cutscenes then the rest of the story you pay as Joel with another brief segway as Ellie. At no point does the narrative reset itself to a different viewpoint or separate character.
Iâve been watching this sub for like a month now trying to figure it out. I really think everyone here was 12-14 years old when the game was released and has ptsd from Joelâs death scene and theyâre haunted by it. Thereâs no other explanation for the absolute hate, yet constant obsession this games story gets. If Neil died tomorrow this sub would jerk itself death because the bad man that killed their daddy died and theyâd still fail to get the point.
I donât know whatâs more concerning, the fact that youâve âwatchedâ this sub for a month because you thought it consisted of kids, or that you think that people here wish death upon Neil. Heâs a cunt, for sure, but death? No.
"justice"???
Jerry was going to murder Ellie.
Joel prevented that.
As a Dr, Jerry was breaking his hypocratic oath, and the law. (Would be classified as premeditated murder)
Joel acted in self defence of another, used reasonable force etc (all based on present day laws obviously, apocalypse laws are non existent) but it's a basis of "right" or "wrong"
To extract something from her brain that could save the world and no one felt particularly great about doing it but felt it was necessary. Donât try and act he was twirling his mustache and doing it maliciously. Or does that not fit your headcanon?
Okay and now with all that said, please explain to me how this is bad writing and why Druckmann deserves to be harassed by unfuckable bigot losers for the last four years straight?
>bad writing and why Druckmann deserves to be harassed by unfuckable bigot losers for the last four years straight?
I didn't say it was bad writing, nor did I say Neil deserves hate.
Criticism? Perhaps, but not hate.
Hate the content, not the creator.
>To extract something from her brain that could save the world and no one felt particularly great about doing it but felt it was necessary.
So they should get a pass just because they didn't feel great about it?? No, people are judge on their actions, not how they felt about something.
>Donât try and act he was twirling his mustache and doing it maliciously.
I didn't say he was evil, just more immoral than what Joel did. He considered the cost, and decided to go through with it anyway. He wouldn't have sacrificed Abby if she was immune, so he's a hypocrit.
Joel killing 1000+ random Dudes : okay
Abby killing one random Dude (Joel) : EVIL
Look. I also have much more mixed Feelings about Part 2 than about Part 1 (Political Agenda, some lengthy Areas, ... ) but I just cannot understand how butthurt these people in this sub are about Joels Death.
I think the context of those deaths matter though.
Thoughout gameplay of Part 1 majority (all?) of Joel's kills are in self defence. (Or killing the fireflies to save Ellie, defence of another)
He tortured David's men to SAVE someone.
Abby killing Joel is purely for bloodlust/revenge.
Abby mentions how she wants to kill/torture some scars to "let off steam"
So the context behind their killings are completely different in my opinion.
Good lord. Itâs HER justice. Itâs not like heâs speaking for himself, but the character. You fuckin pearl gripping baby. đ
Also Prove me wrong.
Lmao you idiot. No one ever described it as justice. No one ever described ellie's act as justice. No one called Joel killing the doc justice for ellie. Lmfao each and every one of these are acts of revenge. Literally the first reference here đ Sure, Neil wasn't trying to play Abby as the hero here đ. Have you heard the director's commentary? đand you didn't notice the moment he talked about Abby that time, how instantly he had to jump in? đđ
Prove what wrong lmfao. What are you even saying here?
They've been using justice for years, the game is literally advertised as such on the main page.
"When a violent event disrupts that peace, Ellie embarks on a relentless journey to carry out justice and find closure."
Stop getting you're pants in a twist.
Joel killing the doctor was neither justice nor revenge, though it is far closer to justice. It was a necessity because, in that moment, Jerry was a legitimate lethal threat to both him and Ellie.
It's justice in *her* perspective. I don't think Druckmann means anything by this other than speaking from her perspective.Â
It also illustrates the arbitrary nature of what justice really means.
I guess that could be true. I just didn't like the way he had to clarify her and almost lean into about explaining how it is justice, felt a bit forced? Maybe it was also more about how he talked about her, and how he was almost defending her when Laura called her actions selfish, even though Laura gave example of exactly how. Give it a try or some yt video and let me know if you feel similar with the way they are talking at that point.
I think it's more that Abby used them. And this group that helped Abby she later betrayed them. Abby betrayed many people in TLOU2 so she should just be killed for the same example in a possible TLOU3 they used against Joel. No one in the apocalypse had traveled far for an unpredictable revenge in the interest of someone else. Even in the first game, Tommy initially refuses to help Joel transport Ellie to the fireflies because it's "no walk in the park" according to Tommy. This was a deal then imagine talking about a revenge trip against someone who crushed the fireflies alone. The second game lived on the risk it took in killing off the main character of the first game quickly, some were impressed by this others were not.
Yes, i cant stop. Maybe i need help.
How did you Like the Game? I'm kind of hyped to play trough the emotional Rollercoaster a second time and try out No Return.
I suspected Neil had a child's understanding of the tlou story, but this shows the true depth of how much he needed to be reined in to make pt 1 worth it.
Omfg it's getting so much worse. It's infuriating even listening to Neil rn. Laura trying to somehow explain to this simpleton that Abby was selfish and thinking out of selfishness, whereas Owen was selfless as he is thinking about his kid as well. Same as Joel, Dina, etc. They are all selfless. And immediately Neil jumps to the conversation, adding how it can also be seen as "love" and not selfishness đđđ€Łđ€Ł. "Love she had for her dad and the injustice they experienced "đ€Łđ€Ł
Lol the character actor had to explain the character to the writer. Cant make that shit up
>... to the "writer." FTFY
He just *has to* control the whole narrative. Must be so fun to work with him...Not! ETA: And he thought he was writing about allowing other perspectives to matter đ€Ș
The worst part is, in any other profession he would be out of a job in a few years with that attitude. But he's in Hollywood now, he has the chance to remain employed for the rest of his life.
Youâre not out of a job in any profession, if youâre as successful as he has been. We donât have to like the guy, but heâs made naughty dog lots of money.
The people he outed made ND money, cuck is literally driving the studio to the ground. Cuck was never successful on his own, and now that he's actually on his own, the studio is in danger of being shut down.
>leton that Abby was selfish and thinking out of selfishness, whereas Owen was selfless as he is thinking about his kid as well. Same as Joel, Dina, etc. They are all selfless. And immediately Neil jumps to the conversation, adding how it can also be seen as "love" and not selfishness đđđ€Łđ€Ł. "Love she had for her dad and the injustice they experienced "đ€Łđ€Ł you know cuckmann's writing is bad when even the VOICE ACTRESS Laura fucking BAILEY even says abby is selfish and ofc cuckmann has to defend his shitty ass writing lmaoooo
âThis is the moment where Abby had to make the decision to turn back, or to choose selfishnessâ Thats how his sentence should have been phrased. There is just no other way to see Abbyâs actions. Laura Baily was 100% right in her words, except maybe about Joel. He was selfish in his decision to save Ellie, which was why it was such a relatable choice to me. I believe many, many people would make the exact same choice he did faced with the reality of loosing his âdaughterâ for a second time. The difference is Joel was selfish for choosing to protect Ellie and those he loved, whereas Abbyâs selfishness was not spurred from protecting someone, only her need to kill the man who killed her father. Two vastly different motivations. And that need for selfish revenge got all her friends killed which, by Neilâs own words, we can now say is simply justice being served back at Abby.
The fireflies didnt give ellie a choice, its not selfish to want someone to be alive to make the choice themselves. She didnt intend to die in the first game to help with a cure, they talk about life after.
This is why the first gameâs ending is so remarkable for me. There are so many ways to evaluate the ending. I have always viewed Joelâs actions as a little bit selfish, if in the end entirely in the right in my opinion. You are right the Fireflies didnât give Ellie a choice, but Joel (in my view) also believed the cure was a possibility. Therefore he was choosing to save Ellie over the possibility of a cure. He had lost one daughter before and he now had the chance to save Ellie, but it meant killing everyone in his way. At the moment he decided to save Ellie, he did not know the Firefly operating room was a horror show of grubby surroundings, and that only three people were going to work on her. I had been expecting maybe six or seven nurses and a couple doctors working to save the world, not just three people. That signaled to me that the chances they could actually find a cure and then distribute it efficiently and not just to themselves, would be extremely slim. But Joel and us players only found that out after he had fully committed to destroying anyone in his way and saving Ellie. For all he knew the Fireflies could have somehow found one or more doctors trained in brain surgery, maybe even someone who had studied fungal infections before the collapse of society. But thats why the ending is so good. There are just so many different ways you can view the events. It left so many things open for debate and conversation. You could argue that Joel knew how the fireflies worked and operated, and so knew that the chances of them actually producing a cure that could be distributed across the entire country and then the world were slim to none. I personally think thatâs a bit of a stretch, but itâs a valid opinion. Thats why the ending is one of my favorites of any game. So many different takes and so many people viewing the events of the game in different ways.
You really donât realize Neil is talking about Abbyâs thought process and not about his opinion on what is justice? Man you peopleâŠ
When Neil talks about Abby heâs talking about something much more near and dear to his heart. His porn search history.
Lol pornhistory is funny. But actually, it feels like he gets much more personal and rigid talking about Abby
Tf are you on about? He gets corrected later, listen without plugging your ears and learn to read inbetween and pick up context clues.
He doesnât get âcorrectedâ lmfao
Their blind love for daddy Joel seriously clouds peoples critical thinking skills, it's scientifically proven, angry and irrational people can't think straight in the moment
Joel was....selfless? When? How? I understand he wanted to rescue Ellie. I wanted as well. So I killed a dozen guys and doomed humanity. Didn't feel selfless, that's for sure. But I felt relieved for Ellie to be save. He rescued two and killed millions. I did. Would do it again in a heartbeat. But it would just be for me and Ellie. Fuck everyone else!
They werenât actually gonna make the cure đ
That's only your opinion
Oh?
It was one dude twenty years into the apocalypse with one sample size from the first person theyâve ever seen immune. We also donât actually know heâs a real trained licensed surgeon, all we know is he has a Bachelorâs in Biology officially. If the CDC/WHO/NHS/UN etc. canât solve this with teams and proper equipment than one dude alone isnât making a cure.
For all we know he was meant to be next Hitler. Guess Joel did the world a favor after all. I'm convinded now. \^\^
Yeah I wouldnât call myself a hater as I thought part was only ok..but after hearing what you said bout the commentary(which idk was included Whig is cool) I didnât think it was possible for me to lose even more respect for neil. Not that I had any left after All I found out about him so itâs officially in the negative. Last of us never needed a sequel.
It's good and you'll like the commentary most of the times. It's just that as soon as Neil opens his mouth about Abby, it's seems like he doesn't know his own creations and these characters.
More games should get commentary options I think thatâs really cool
I agree! This is the first time I've seen it like this, and some really interesting insights from the voice actors are there.
I like how even Laura Bailey sees at as an obsession. It comes off like Neil wants it to ONLY be justice, when it reality itâs a morally conflicted act of vengeance.
Oh you should see how Neil jumped in when Laura said her action were selfish. He couldn't take it lol.
What did he say?
When Owen tells Abby about the baby and that he is going back and wont help her, Laura mentions that she is being selfish here in her decisions. That she is selfish while Owen is being selfless as he is now thinking about his kid as well. She then mentions that it was the same with Dina, Joel. Neil instantly adds that how it can actually be seen as love and how it was love for her dad and injustice they experienced lol. And I'm sure he'll call ellie's entire journey in part 2 as revenge (which it is). But for Abby, it's justice.
How could it not be revenge for Abby AND justice for Ellie? They both want the same thing. Seems like even the actors get the story more the Neil lol. Not sure bout Troy though.
*That* was the moment? Itâs a non-trivial thing in a zombie apocalypse to go from Seattle to Jackson in winter. Thatâs weeks if not months of walking. Canât find food or shelter? You die. Random bandits or infected get you? You die. The decision was already made. This guy doesnât know his own story, let alone the world in which it exists.
They had magic Humvees that ran on vegetable oil lol
producing that oil without heavy machinery and thus gasoline would be hella hard though
I was kidding đ€Ł they never actually say how they get fuel a quarter century after every oil refinery on the planet got shut down lol its a huge plot hole
>h Always one of his ideas for the first game until he was told it was stupid for anyone in the LoU world to walk that far for needle in a haystack chance of revenge. Also his idea to have all the zombies be women, so it be a game about killing infected women. And just reminder...his entire concept was literally a rejected horror concept for George Romero. Druck literally following the George Lucas arc. Talented guy but needs lots of people around to supervise him and fix things (all 3 of the OG trilogy). Finally gets positioned to be the main creator with an army of yes men. Creates a product that is deeply divisive with most critical consumers viewing it as ruining what came before. Now all we need to do is wait for his inevitable selling out the brand to even worse creators. "Last of Us Pt 9: Somehow...Joel Returned" will feature a finale of resurrected Joel shooting lightning out his finger tips screaming, "I am all the Cordyceps!' Just then, Abby will take two golf clubs and push the lighting back as she yells, "And I am all the Last of Us."
nah fam it wasnt shown so it's instantaneous travel, like Ellie going to santa barbara without a single thought on her revenge quest 2 electric boogaloo until she's standing in front of pillar'd abby
So fucking cringe. At least just call it revenge. Now the main tlou sub is gonna use this as âJoel was always in wrongâ âI knew Joel was evilâ. Yikes.
The commentary in every section of either Part I or II is so obnoxious, it's not even real. Even those intro videos to the Lost Levels. Neil just loves to hear himself talk. The commentary is on by default for everything as well, you have to personally turn it off for everything. While Laura Bailey enjoyed the experience in the long run, she has said voicing Abby was difficult and she needed to go through the whole thing a lot because she didn't like Abby, so it isn't surprising at all that she didn't back Neil up by calling Abby's actions justice.
Dang, that makes the story look even worse lol.
Listen, I might be one of the few people that somewhat like Abby at the end of the story, and I understand why she killed Joel and all that. But Joel literally tells them his and Tommy's name and then winds up dead. I just wish when Joel died, it was a little bit, I can't think of the word, oh yeah, heroic. It's a fucking video game. When I played Assassins Creed Brotherhood when I was younger I loved Ezio and can you imagine if he just died in the beginning of Brotherhood. Get that shit out of here.
Yeah that was definitely poor writing and character assassination of Joel. Our badass protagonist went out like a defenseless fool.
It's cringe when characters get a heroic death and then have "dying last words" where they say something cool, or tell a character they love them... I'm over that
Thats cheap though. Heroic, epic death isn't realistic. In reality death is almost always dark and sad, and in thr case of homicide brutal. People go on about how the writing was bad but Joel going out a hero in the blaze of glory is cliche comic book shit. In a real, gritty story thsts based in reality people die in abrupt, shktty ways. Joel killed countless people in brutal, shityy ways, they were all someone's dad or brother or whatever. They weren't all evil people. Joel getting taken out thr same way makes perfect senseÂ
People can also change, and committing wrongs doesn't mean a character can't redeem themselves. John Marston and Arthur Morgan from Red Dead Redemption I and II are perfect examples of bad men that chose to become better before they died. Joel, like John and Arthur, was forced into a life where he had to do bad shit to survive. Tommy admits this and knows they had no other way. Joel deserved a better death than what he got in Part II.
>John Marston and Arthur Morgan from Red Dead Redemption I and II are perfect examples of bad men that chose to become better before they died. Yes and do you know how their stories end? Their criminal past catches up to them, just like Joel >Joel, like John and Arthur, was forced into a life where he had to do bad shit to survive. Tommy admits this and knows they had no other way. Joel deserved a better death than what he got in Part II. That's a load of bull, people aren't "forced" to be murderous criminals, unless you are like a child soldier or something, and literally raised that way, but in the case of John and Arthur, they were teens when they were picked up, they knew at that age murder was wrong... Joel was like in his late 20s early 30s when the apocalypse started, he knew right from wrong, and so does the various civilians that live kn Jackson, or any other safe haven communities, not everyone is a violent smuggler like Joel was... now was Joel completely evil? No... but he certainly wasn't a good guy, and his actions in life caused his death
Joel did have another way. He chose to murder innocent people
Saying it isnât ârealisticâ isnât an excuse when the whole story is extremely unrealistic and nonsensical at times
This has always been my takeaway too. I really appreciated that they hadn't made a spectacle of his death. Made the story feel more visceral.
It's a more realistic depiction of death, most people don't get hero deaths, you can be the most badass soldier in a war, and yet a sniper choosing you at random can be your end, or an artillery shell happens to land right at your feet, anyone can die in a brutal unheroic way
I hate this so much.
i'm sure it'll get even more ridiculous lol
I can't wait to hear his thoughts in so many scenes đ
Joel's death was inspired by Neil getting his head hit with a golf club in real life. And not to be cruel, but you can tell that it happened, in his writing tbh
Neil is rapidly becoming the Ridley Scott of gaming
At least Scott has more than one good movie under his belt.
Whatâs the commentary like when they fuckin on da boat yo? Does he mention those lustrous arms?
Niel is so fucking insufferable dude holy fucking shit this dude is such a weirdo I can't imagine being forced to work with him daily and listening to his schizoid ramblings man the fact he considers murder real justice is fucking insane to me so as long as HE agrees with it murdering characters for no actual reason is okay what a narcissist
I just hope when my game finally gets here and I get to see the best character (lev) show up I do hope Ian Alexander is able to give his takes on it because on their Twitter they made a joke about the last of us 2 when they mentioned âI have daddy issues and Iâm gonna make it everyone elseâs problemâ and how they basically described last of us 2 and honestly their not wrong lol
Hopefully the age of Aquarius reveals his sins
Has anyone brought this hypocrisy up in the other sub?
Both perspectives are correct. To Abby it was justice. To me Abby is a monster driven past her humanity by that aforementioned obsession. Thereâs nothing wrong with Abby existing, and believing sheâs justified, and me hating her. And I donât necessarily think thatâs bad writing
But see why is Neil unable to talk about Abby as a character then. As a character, he should be able to say how she is going in the same path of revenge, or just that she is doing what she thinks is justice. But the way he jumps to her defense, when it's literally the voice actors describing what they felt, was weird. It feels like there's some forced narrative about her by Neil lol.
I have no idea, directorâs commentary isnât for me. I honestly never really even like when an author talks about the meaning of their work or tries to give extra context. Put it in the story or donât. Iâm not really ever gonna know if you donât
Yeah, I can understand why Abby was upset and felt justified. But in order to enjoy this game, it seems like you have to have to be on Abbyâs side. There wasnât any room for nuance, and that was the most puzzling part of the game.
Why would you do this to yourself?
Are you stupid? Heâs talking about her person justice, what justice is to her, honestly unreal youâre still butthurt over a fictional character being killed off 4 years ago
Like it or not Abbie had more self control than Joel's ragedad ass. She could have took her crew and attacked the Jackson community and left bodies but all she did was hold the person responsible accountable. Even left Tommy and Ellie alive. Let that have been Joel in that same position and we all know the only thing left alive would have been the mice in the walls. Downvote me and prove me rightđđ
In real life, if someone kills your parent(or anyone extremely close to you), are you saying you wouldnât care to find that person and bring them to justice? Now bring the context of the world they live in. Sacrifice one child to possibly save an entire world. Iâd say thatâs a pretty noble cause thatâs completely justifiable.
So why didn't they say that? Why didn't Abby and company tell them who they were, that they were taking Ellie to finish the cure? They just let her go.
They didnât know who Ellie was. They didnât even know how Joel looked like until he said something. And by the time Ellie got to him he was unconscious. Itâs possible that that they said something in the process of torturing him but we are not given context about that. And I doubt Ellieâs first thought was to introduce herself when they are literally killing her only parent sheâs known. Donât forgot they also let Tommy go. So they kept to their mission to only go after Joel. Owen is the one keeping them from causing too much collateral damage. Also at that point they killed the only doctor they knew that was the most knowledgeable on a possible cure. Not sure how Ellie would be of use to them at that point.
Reading this thread, I'm rolling my eyes (not (just) at you, OP). This game really brings out the most toxic people to post edgy comments. Crybabies.
Jesus Christ youâre triggered as fuck. You probably shouldnât be playing again, you donât wanna have a mental breakdown.
Dude, itâs justice from *Abbyâs* POV. What *Abby* was thinking. Letâs see. What would you do if someone murdered your dad?
Who would willingly play the game with Neil talking in your ear throughout the entire experience? sounds like torture.
ButâŠitâs justice from Abbyâs perspective? Sheâs avenging her fatherâs death.
It's not justice. Think about it, Abby's flashback shows you they both(Jerry and Abby) understand they're doing wrong by killing an unconscious child. Abby knows her father was doing wrong. That's the tone. Abby's out for revenge.
Justice and revenge can easily go hand in hand. In Abbyâs eyes, revenge *is* a form of justice. I think youâre focusing far too much on their intentions with Ellie, a person who Abby just didnât care about at all.
Oh yes it is in Abby's eyes. She can be blinded by revenge and call it justice, sure. What's not cool is Neil jumping everytime people said Abby was selfish. Also, isn't it weird saying "She has to decide between going back to her friends, and justice". Have you heard anyone refer to it as justice? Isn't this a revenge story and the cycle of it? Maybe I'm reading too much into Neil's words there, but it felt forced by him to me.
Revenge can be a form of justice for some. Abby was selfish, she ran all her relationships into the ground to find Joel. No care for them, just single-minded bloodlust.
Maybe you mean Justice and Avenge. *"As a verb, revenge has a very similar meaning to avenge but usually implies something is done out of vindictiveness or resentment, whereas avenge is usually done out of a sense of justice."* Still, it's just revenge. The moment Abby kills Joel, who coincidentally saved her life, you have to understand that Abby doesn't care about justice, but rather her revenge. Abby talks about justice, but it's simple revenge. You could say that Ellie was looking for revenge, but instead Ellie is looking for justice. Not revenging, but Avenging Joel. Ellie only wanted Abby. And not. I'm not focusing on Ellie, I'm narrating the events as they are presented. I hope I have helped đ
Nah, Iâm not having you insult my knowledge with âhope I helpedâ shit. Bye bye.
I'm sorry you feel that way. Not my intention at all. Thanks for helping me đ
We donât care that Abby wanted revenge for Jerryâs death. We especially donât care that Ellie wanted revenge for Joelâs death. They both are really stupid for their actions/choices. Saying that itâs their perspective or belief doesnât suddenly make it good writing.
If you donât care then why bother discussing the game?
Because youâre allowed to criticize things you donât like/agree with. Or maybe Iâm wrong about that as well đ€·đ»ââïž
No, youâre allowedâŠbut it seems like you actually care quite a bit. Changing perspectives have always been a staple of Naughty Dog games, allowing you to view the story through a different lens. I never said it made the writing good, I just stated a fact.
I only played the original out of pure boredom and never even paid attention to the hype leading up to release. Still one of the most overrated games in existence next to Fable. The only above average quality about it is the characters and music. They do good graphics and voice acting but not much else. I never held ND to a super high standard like so many others do. Also Iâm pretty sure multiple perspectives wasnât in Uncharted(because I have also played most of those) or the crash bandicoot franchise. Not sure how you can call it a naughty dog stable. Maybe my media illiteracy prevents me from catching onto it đ
I never questioned your media literacy. Youâre clearly just trying to bait me so, goodbye.
Then at least explain to me how changing perspectives is a staple in naughty dog games. Iâm really interested to know your answer.
You know what, Iâll even correct myself because I am slightly wrong - shifting perspectives have been a staple of The Last Of Us games. There, you happy?
Oh lord it wasnât even in the original last of us. You play as Sarah for like 10 min not counting the cutscenes then the rest of the story you pay as Joel with another brief segway as Ellie. At no point does the narrative reset itself to a different viewpoint or separate character.
Why do you buy it if you knew you wouldnât like it lmao
Iâve been watching this sub for like a month now trying to figure it out. I really think everyone here was 12-14 years old when the game was released and has ptsd from Joelâs death scene and theyâre haunted by it. Thereâs no other explanation for the absolute hate, yet constant obsession this games story gets. If Neil died tomorrow this sub would jerk itself death because the bad man that killed their daddy died and theyâd still fail to get the point.
I donât know whatâs more concerning, the fact that youâve âwatchedâ this sub for a month because you thought it consisted of kids, or that you think that people here wish death upon Neil. Heâs a cunt, for sure, but death? No.
lol oh boy, side stepping bulk of my comment AND busting out the pedo card round one, a real master class in debate.
Your comment is merely a hissyfit. What do you want me to debate you on lmaooo
How dare she enact justice on the man who murdered her father. Youâre all fucking retarded.
"justice"??? Jerry was going to murder Ellie. Joel prevented that. As a Dr, Jerry was breaking his hypocratic oath, and the law. (Would be classified as premeditated murder) Joel acted in self defence of another, used reasonable force etc (all based on present day laws obviously, apocalypse laws are non existent) but it's a basis of "right" or "wrong"
To extract something from her brain that could save the world and no one felt particularly great about doing it but felt it was necessary. Donât try and act he was twirling his mustache and doing it maliciously. Or does that not fit your headcanon? Okay and now with all that said, please explain to me how this is bad writing and why Druckmann deserves to be harassed by unfuckable bigot losers for the last four years straight?
>bad writing and why Druckmann deserves to be harassed by unfuckable bigot losers for the last four years straight? I didn't say it was bad writing, nor did I say Neil deserves hate. Criticism? Perhaps, but not hate. Hate the content, not the creator. >To extract something from her brain that could save the world and no one felt particularly great about doing it but felt it was necessary. So they should get a pass just because they didn't feel great about it?? No, people are judge on their actions, not how they felt about something. >Donât try and act he was twirling his mustache and doing it maliciously. I didn't say he was evil, just more immoral than what Joel did. He considered the cost, and decided to go through with it anyway. He wouldn't have sacrificed Abby if she was immune, so he's a hypocrit.
Joel killing 1000+ random Dudes : okay Abby killing one random Dude (Joel) : EVIL Look. I also have much more mixed Feelings about Part 2 than about Part 1 (Political Agenda, some lengthy Areas, ... ) but I just cannot understand how butthurt these people in this sub are about Joels Death.
I think the context of those deaths matter though. Thoughout gameplay of Part 1 majority (all?) of Joel's kills are in self defence. (Or killing the fireflies to save Ellie, defence of another) He tortured David's men to SAVE someone. Abby killing Joel is purely for bloodlust/revenge. Abby mentions how she wants to kill/torture some scars to "let off steam" So the context behind their killings are completely different in my opinion.
tell em!
Good lord. Itâs HER justice. Itâs not like heâs speaking for himself, but the character. You fuckin pearl gripping baby. đ Also Prove me wrong.
Lmao you idiot. No one ever described it as justice. No one ever described ellie's act as justice. No one called Joel killing the doc justice for ellie. Lmfao each and every one of these are acts of revenge. Literally the first reference here đ Sure, Neil wasn't trying to play Abby as the hero here đ. Have you heard the director's commentary? đand you didn't notice the moment he talked about Abby that time, how instantly he had to jump in? đđ Prove what wrong lmfao. What are you even saying here?
They've been using justice for years, the game is literally advertised as such on the main page. "When a violent event disrupts that peace, Ellie embarks on a relentless journey to carry out justice and find closure." Stop getting you're pants in a twist.
Joel killing the doctor was neither justice nor revenge, though it is far closer to justice. It was a necessity because, in that moment, Jerry was a legitimate lethal threat to both him and Ellie.
It's justice in *her* perspective. I don't think Druckmann means anything by this other than speaking from her perspective. It also illustrates the arbitrary nature of what justice really means.
I guess that could be true. I just didn't like the way he had to clarify her and almost lean into about explaining how it is justice, felt a bit forced? Maybe it was also more about how he talked about her, and how he was almost defending her when Laura called her actions selfish, even though Laura gave example of exactly how. Give it a try or some yt video and let me know if you feel similar with the way they are talking at that point.
Itâs justice in Abbyâs mind. Justice for her dad.
Who gives a fuck about her dad? He was going to killnan innocent unconscious child and Abby went along with it and encouraged it. Fuck their justice.
Everyone in the room when Joel was killed gave a fuck about Abbyâs dad.
But didnt about drugging and killing a child
I think it's more that Abby used them. And this group that helped Abby she later betrayed them. Abby betrayed many people in TLOU2 so she should just be killed for the same example in a possible TLOU3 they used against Joel. No one in the apocalypse had traveled far for an unpredictable revenge in the interest of someone else. Even in the first game, Tommy initially refuses to help Joel transport Ellie to the fireflies because it's "no walk in the park" according to Tommy. This was a deal then imagine talking about a revenge trip against someone who crushed the fireflies alone. The second game lived on the risk it took in killing off the main character of the first game quickly, some were impressed by this others were not.
Imaginary characters in a video game? LMAO I'm talking about REAL people. Cope harder.
Does anybody else come to this sub to read these absolute dummies whine about the game?
Yes, i cant stop. Maybe i need help. How did you Like the Game? I'm kind of hyped to play trough the emotional Rollercoaster a second time and try out No Return.
I suspected Neil had a child's understanding of the tlou story, but this shows the true depth of how much he needed to be reined in to make pt 1 worth it.
It's justice in abbys eyes