I do feel like everything they're doing to try and humanize/ingratiate me to Abby is having the opposite effect. Having her be part of an extremely militant society whose rallying call is 'may your death be swift' just makes me hate the WLF even more.
Even the part with her playing fetch with a dog that's definitely supposed to twist the knife about you killing them as Ellie just a little bit ago, all I could think was 'you're actively breeding these dogs to kill and be wielded as weapons'
Not to mention their apparent apathy at Mel, who is extremely pregnant being sent to the 'front lines' which is apparently dangerous enough to get them special treatment in line for food
I do feel like everything they're doing to try and humanize/ingratiate me to Abby is having the opposite effect. Having her be part of an extremely militant society whose rallying call is 'may your death be swift' just makes me hate the WLF even more.
Even the part with her playing fetch with a dog that's definitely supposed to twist the knife about you killing them as Ellie just a little bit ago, all I could think was 'you're actively breeding these dogs to kill and be wielded as weapons'
Not to mention their apparent apathy at Mel, who is extremely pregnant being sent to the 'front lines' which is apparently dangerous enough to get them special treatment in line for food
THANK YOU.
Not to mention the game takes all player agency out of the equation when it forces you to kill the dog. It's a cheap, manipulative ploy to make Ellie seem more monstrous and Abby get some perceived moral high ground. No matter how much you love dogs, there's no way you're not going to fight back if you can when there's one about to rip your throat out.
I just really, really can't fathom how Druckman thought trying to force empathy for Abby in this way was a good idea. I've heard the argument that if the story were un-Tarantino'd and fed to us in chronological order, we would've gotten more time with her before killing Joel, thus gotten to understand her headspace a little more. Conversely, the little time we got with Joel and Ellie together would've felt longer and more substantial. To this end, I'm downloading all the game cutscenes and going to try a re-edit myself to see how much this theory holds up.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
Did Dina just stay at the theater? I feel like I must have missed something cause she's not with Ellie.
Yes, the revelation that she's pregnant leads to Ellie continuing alone, both because Dina is early enough to still be getting morning sickness and also because she's pregnant
Her being so pregnant, yet going out on a front line mission, bugged the hell out of me....moreso because it's pointed out that she could probably get excused and not go meaning it's not necessary.
XBL: Bizazedo
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
Her being so pregnant, yet going out on a front line mission, bugged the hell out of me....moreso because it's pointed out that she could probably get excused and not go meaning it's not necessary.
Really, REALLY taxed my suspension of disbelief.
I find it very hard to buy her being irresponsible and flippant enough to walk into essentially active warzones like that, especially when she's the fucking doctor of the group. Makes it way, way more difficult to muster up any sympathy for her or her supposed friends who allow her to go out or don't even question it. I mean, they have an entire army of able-bodied soldiers at their disposal.
Smacks of lazy, contrived writing. It needed to happen because the plot needed to move forward.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
I do feel like everything they're doing to try and humanize/ingratiate me to Abby is having the opposite effect. Having her be part of an extremely militant society whose rallying call is 'may your death be swift' just makes me hate the WLF even more.
Even the part with her playing fetch with a dog that's definitely supposed to twist the knife about you killing them as Ellie just a little bit ago, all I could think was 'you're actively breeding these dogs to kill and be wielded as weapons'
Not to mention their apparent apathy at Mel, who is extremely pregnant being sent to the 'front lines' which is apparently dangerous enough to get them special treatment in line for food
THANK YOU.
Not to mention the game takes all player agency out of the equation when it forces you to kill the dog. It's a cheap, manipulative ploy to make Ellie seem more monstrous and Abby get some perceived moral high ground. No matter how much you love dogs, there's no way you're not going to fight back if you can when there's one about to rip your throat out.
I just really, really can't fathom how Druckman thought trying to force empathy for Abby in this way was a good idea. I've heard the argument that if the story were un-Tarantino'd and fed to us in chronological order, we would've gotten more time with her before killing Joel, thus gotten to understand her headspace a little more. Conversely, the little time we got with Joel and Ellie together would've felt longer and more substantial. To this end, I'm downloading all the game cutscenes and going to try a re-edit myself to see how much this theory holds up.
ehh
the remit of literature has always been to force us to empathise with those we might not otherwise, from shakespeare on down. i understand that it might not have been effective for you, but it was for me. probably because the most immediate thing the second half of the narrative does is introduce a war-like context, which reframes the violence and the characters' sensitivity to it. it spoke to me of atrocities in the world wars and africa's civil conflicts, where we know humans were/are capable of some gut-churning shit. but they're still humans. that's what we have to reckon with.
i am going to check myself here because i'm not finished yet and endings are always where the most important messages are sent. we'll see how we go.
Her being so pregnant, yet going out on a front line mission, bugged the hell out of me....moreso because it's pointed out that she could probably get excused and not go meaning it's not necessary.
Really, REALLY taxed my suspension of disbelief.
I find it very hard to buy her being irresponsible and flippant enough to walk into essentially active warzones like that, especially when she's the fucking doctor of the group. Makes it way, way more difficult to muster up any sympathy for her or her supposed friends who allow her to go out or don't even question it. I mean, they have an entire army of able-bodied soldiers at their disposal.
Smacks of lazy, contrived writing.
A big recurring thing in these games is 'it's easier to sacrifice yourself than it is to sacrifice others'. Ellie despises Joel when it comes out what he did, noting that she would have been willing to die to save humanity. But I doubt the choice would have been as easy if the roles were reversed. Based on her decision to rampage in response to his death, it sounds like it wouldn't be as clear-cut. Jerry definitely admits that he wouldn't be as willing to cut up Abby if she were immune instead, even if Abby says 'I'd want you to do it.'
Lots of people are willing to die, but stop short of seeing the ones they love meet the same fate, even if they express their consent.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
If we're backing off and asking who's moral, here, I'm not getting so much that Abby is a better person than Ellie. She's certainly nicer and as we often see is very selfless - still not done yet - but the crux of the moral argument is this:
We were onboard when Ellie wanted revenge for the murder of her father.
I'm on board with Abby wanting the same thing. They're pretty morally-equal, it's just that Ellie is fucking rude.
The fact that Abby is with the WLF doesn't make her a shitty person any more than Joel being with Tess made him a shitty person (though it sure helped!). Ellie and Abby both just kinda' slid in with the folks they were with in order to survive, and didn't really choose shit.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
The point of the dogs is, so far, kind of the point of the game for me. An event is amoral. A dog dying is an event, and holds no moral weight. It only becomes a bad thing or a good thing when you have a perspective on the dog.
Ellie: Whew.
Dog Handler #57: Lassiiiieee!
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
I never played the first game, just watched a recap.
But it’s tough not to compare Ellie’s intro and community with Abby’s. Jackson is a community, and Abby’s home is run like a military installation, with Abby being a willing and eager soldier in it.
Joel is a horrible person who did not deserve a happy ending, but his first instinct when coming across a stranger was still to save their life. When Jessie makes it to Seattle, the way he tells it, they shot first, and asked questions never. And then there’s the dogs. And all this isn't to protect from Infected either, but primarily to kill other non-infected humans.
Ellie and Abby may be on the same quest, but Abby definitely has more in common with Joel than she does with Ellie.
The point of the dogs is, so far, kind of the point of the game for me. An event is amoral. A dog dying is an event, and holds no moral weight. It only becomes a bad thing or a good thing when you have a perspective on the dog.
Ellie: Whew.
Dog Handler #57: Lassiiiieee!
The 'dog handlers' in this game are dog handlers in the same way that Michael Vick is a 'dog handler'
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
I never played the first game, just watched a recap.
But it’s tough not to compare Ellie’s intro and community with Abby’s. Jackson is a community, and Abby’s home is run like a military installation, with Abby being a willing and eager soldier in it.
Joel is a horrible person who did not deserve a happy ending, but his first instinct when coming across a stranger was still to save their life. When Jessie makes it to Seattle, the way he tells it, they shot first, and asked questions never. And then there’s the dogs. And all this isn't to protect from Infected either, but primarily to kill other non-infected humans.
Ellie and Abby may be on the same quest, but Abby definitely has more in common with Joel than she does with Ellie.
absolutely, but consider
abby is four years down her dark path; ellie's is just beginning. if war came to jackson, and her quest to destroy abby was drawn out for years, would not ellie also channel her unresolved anger into her more immediate enemies? would she not be "jackson's best scar killer?"
when joel and ellie are exploring the dinosaur museum and you pause by the dimetrodon, we see where ellie's going. i can't remember the exact dialogue, but the message is there: she may be a little short, but by the time this is done she will be the apex predator
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
The point of the dogs is, so far, kind of the point of the game for me. An event is amoral. A dog dying is an event, and holds no moral weight. It only becomes a bad thing or a good thing when you have a perspective on the dog.
Ellie: Whew.
Dog Handler #57: Lassiiiieee!
The 'dog handlers' in this game are dog handlers in the same way that Michael Vick is a 'dog handler'
(Google "Michael Vick.)
...
I'mma' go ahead and trust you on that.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
I think one of the themes of this game is “yeah yeah, man is the REAL monster, whatever. How do you come to terms with that and still see the humanity?” And there are many facets to this question, and there are no right answers. The characters fumble around in the darkness and try to find justice, and even when they mete out justice, they are still broken afterwards. In my mind, the characters are all monsters (except for a certain boy in the second half of the game), but they are also all human. I don’t know why people are so resentful of that, and I appreciate that the game created layers for the protagonists and support characters. Jessie could have easily been the resentful ex, for a small example.
I don’t think any of the setting portrayals were meant to show a perfect society... they are all flawed, but in their own way, from the Boston QZ to Jackson to the factions in Seattle. There are a lot of wrong answers, but also a lot of good ones... and that’s what a society is. I think they did a good job of portraying multi-faceted post-apoc cultures right up until the very end section (which is a comic book, at best).
As far as I know, dogs aren’t affected by the spores or Infected bites in the game’s lore? I think one would want to train armies of attack dogs in that case. Dunno.
Her being so pregnant, yet going out on a front line mission, bugged the hell out of me....moreso because it's pointed out that she could probably get excused and not go meaning it's not necessary.
Really, REALLY taxed my suspension of disbelief.
I find it very hard to buy her being irresponsible and flippant enough to walk into essentially active warzones like that, especially when she's the fucking doctor of the group. Makes it way, way more difficult to muster up any sympathy for her or her supposed friends who allow her to go out or don't even question it. I mean, they have an entire army of able-bodied soldiers at their disposal.
Smacks of lazy, contrived writing. It needed to happen because the plot needed to move forward.
My impression was that:
Manny manipulated things to get Mel and Abby to talk to each other, in what he wrongly assumed was going to be a routine milk run. It smacked of a good friend doing the wrong thing on accident, not about lazy writing.
Often in this game the plotting feels kinda' weak - stuff often feels pret-ty convenient for shuttling our plot forward - but the moment to moment dialogue is pretty okay. Performances? *chefkiss* muah.
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
I do feel like everything they're doing to try and humanize/ingratiate me to Abby is having the opposite effect. Having her be part of an extremely militant society whose rallying call is 'may your death be swift' just makes me hate the WLF even more.
Even the part with her playing fetch with a dog that's definitely supposed to twist the knife about you killing them as Ellie just a little bit ago, all I could think was 'you're actively breeding these dogs to kill and be wielded as weapons'
Not to mention their apparent apathy at Mel, who is extremely pregnant being sent to the 'front lines' which is apparently dangerous enough to get them special treatment in line for food
THANK YOU.
Not to mention the game takes all player agency out of the equation when it forces you to kill the dog. It's a cheap, manipulative ploy to make Ellie seem more monstrous and Abby get some perceived moral high ground. No matter how much you love dogs, there's no way you're not going to fight back if you can when there's one about to rip your throat out.
I just really, really can't fathom how Druckman thought trying to force empathy for Abby in this way was a good idea. I've heard the argument that if the story were un-Tarantino'd and fed to us in chronological order, we would've gotten more time with her before killing Joel, thus gotten to understand her headspace a little more. Conversely, the little time we got with Joel and Ellie together would've felt longer and more substantial. To this end, I'm downloading all the game cutscenes and going to try a re-edit myself to see how much this theory holds up.
ehh
the remit of literature has always been to force us to empathise with those we might not otherwise, from shakespeare on down. i understand that it might not have been effective for you, but it was for me. probably because the most immediate thing the second half of the narrative does is introduce a war-like context, which reframes the violence and the characters' sensitivity to it. it spoke to me of atrocities in the world wars and africa's civil conflicts, where we know humans were/are capable of some gut-churning shit. but they're still humans. that's what we have to reckon with.
i am going to check myself here because i'm not finished yet and endings are always where the most important messages are sent. we'll see how we go.
Right, but if a writer wants you to empathize with a character you normally wouldn't, they need to do their homework and put in the requisite effort to make it happen. Don't read this spoiler until you've beaten it.
Hence my argument about the game being out of chronological order actively harming the impact of the story. If we went from the opening scene with Tommy, Joel singing for Ellie in her room, then right to Abby's flashback with her dad? Boom, some instant curiosity about her and empathy, commingled with the dread of, "oh no, this is right before the end of the last game...I see where this is going." Then, maybe hop to the museum scene as a mirror of the previous one, which tells the player right away how not dissimilar Abby and Ellie are. Then, you can jump into some of the aquarium stuff, move over to Joel and Ellie on patrol, distrust between them growing, then crescendo that with Abby discovering her father's death. You follow it up with Ellie confronting Joel about the Fireflies, swing over to Abby becoming who she is in the present of the story, end this lengthy prologue/first third with the dance night and Joel and Ellie's conversation after that. Thus, you've now established who Abby is, why she hates Joel and wants him dead, the audience can get behind if not condone it, and we conversely have also had a substantial amount of time showing Ellie and Joel together, their relationship evolving, and her finally being (almost) ready to forgive him. When you show their flashbacks out of order, it taints them because we know he's dead, and it ends up just feeling like snippets from a better sequel we'll never get. Bonus: you now also have a sense of trajectory; of these dangerous and angry characters hurtling towards each other, which will make everything that comes after feel built-up to, earned, and all the more tragic.
Then, at long last, you have Abby kill Joel, and the scene hits so much harder now that we've seen the prior scene between him and Ellie, rather than at the very end where it just makes you wish Ellie hadn't spared her because it's fucking devastating. If you reordered everything like this, I feel like it'd be a lot easier to feel conflicted about what Abby did and not outright hate her for it.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
But y'see, that's the problem.
If you played the first game, chances are you love Joel and are in his corner. No matter what curiosity you may have of her from the extremely brief section you play as her in the beginning, no amount of playing with dogs, loving her dad, and hanging out with her friends can walk back the fact the FIRST THING of substance you see her do is brutally torture and murder a character you're attached to with little fanfare and zero remorse until the game suddenly decides two-thirds of the way in that she feels a little guilty and, to quote George Lucas, "may have gone too far in a few places."
Like, a character you should feel anything resembling empathy for might've seen Ellie crying and screaming and begging her to stop on the ground and at least...fucking hesitated for two seconds? Maybe flash her an apologetic look to communicate, "I'm sorry, this wasn't about you." Or at very least, not force her to fucking WATCH her father (figure) be murdered in cold blood? Not even Joel killed Abby's dad right in front of her.
Her being so pregnant, yet going out on a front line mission, bugged the hell out of me....moreso because it's pointed out that she could probably get excused and not go meaning it's not necessary.
Really, REALLY taxed my suspension of disbelief.
I find it very hard to buy her being irresponsible and flippant enough to walk into essentially active warzones like that, especially when she's the fucking doctor of the group. Makes it way, way more difficult to muster up any sympathy for her or her supposed friends who allow her to go out or don't even question it. I mean, they have an entire army of able-bodied soldiers at their disposal.
Smacks of lazy, contrived writing. It needed to happen because the plot needed to move forward.
My impression was that:
Manny manipulated things to get Mel and Abby to talk to each other, in what he wrongly assumed was going to be a routine milk run. It smacked of a good friend doing the wrong thing on accident, not about lazy writing.
Fair point. Since I can't remember anything that outright refutes it, I'll give you that one.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
yeah i'm gonna tread slowly backwards on the conversation for a little minute, at least til i'm done. i will come back and read your perspective though because i'm very interested in the way people perceive this differently!
edit: stupid having a job and kids when you just want to play explicitly violent videogames all day
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Viskod on
+1
Options
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
Dogs
People, get over yourselves. If you ever have to deal with a dog that was trained to kill then you would have zero hesitation with killing every attack dog you encounter in the game. They’re essentially deadly weapons that can think and hunt you down.
People, get over yourselves. If you ever have to deal with a dog that was trained to kill then you would have zero hesitation with killing every attack dog you encounter in the game. They’re essentially deadly weapons that can think and hunt you down.
I don't think that's really the spark of the issue. It's that the game literally forces you to kill one particular dog, in addition into the others you probably optional killed, but then tries to retroactively make you feel terrible by making you play with the same dog, and sort of background implying "all dogs were just like this one, they were all loved by their humans, you monster".
It's "stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself (in the emotions)" the video game.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Okay but
one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The fireflies sucked but the fedra did too. They got real real close to executing Ellie in the first game because she's infected. They're never portrayed as good people either.
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
People, get over yourselves. If you ever have to deal with a dog that was trained to kill then you would have zero hesitation with killing every attack dog you encounter in the game. They’re essentially deadly weapons that can think and hunt you down.
Now these are of course video games dogs so they're not real, but in essence the same principle applies.
It's still possible to kill them out of necessity but also still recognize and be sad for the fact that they're innocent in what they do. Dogs learn by association and not because of any chosen evilness inherent in the dog like with their human masters; "I do this, master happy" is their learned behavior and prevailing drive. They follow their directions not because they understand the right or wrong of what they're doing, or even really understand the 'why' of it - they do it because of an inherent desire for the love and acceptance of their human masters as dictated by thousands of years of domestic breeding.
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Okay but
one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The fireflies sucked but the fedra did too. They got real real close to executing Ellie in the first game because she's infected. They're never portrayed as good people either.
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
What scientists did he kill? He killed the doctor, from what I remember he had no choice in that a) because he pulls a scalpel, and b) because he literally has no choice to progress the game otherwise. The other two were optional. Mostly what he kills are soldiers trying to kill him. There was never any guarantee that the doctor could create a viable vaccine from Ellie, and even if he did, how would they produce it in amounts necessary to save the world?
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Okay but
one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The fireflies sucked but the fedra did too. They got real real close to executing Ellie in the first game because she's infected. They're never portrayed as good people either.
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
What scientists did he kill? He killed the doctor, from what I remember he had no choice in that a) because he pulls a scalpel, and b) because he literally has no choice to progress the game otherwise. The other two were optional. Mostly what he kills are soldiers trying to kill him. There was never any guarantee that the doctor could create a viable vaccine from Ellie, and even if he did, how would they produce it in amounts necessary to save the world?
Moreso even than that, how the hell would they have distributed such a vaccine? Population centers were massively sporadic and scattered. Also, half the people still living and uninfected are crazy cannibals, cultists, or survivalist nutjobs. Do they all get the vaccine too? Do they just get to reintegrate into society with no fuss? And if so, how do you go about finding all these widely separated people to innoculate them?
There was no way logistically a vaccine would've ever been viable. Not to mention if you wanted to synthesize a vaccine for a fungal infection (which is something that isn't done and we really don't have the technology to do), killing Ellie is the LAST thing you would ever want to do. Although I chalk that up to Druckman not researching the science of what he was presenting as thoroughly as he should've.
Zephonate on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Okay but
one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The fireflies sucked but the fedra did too. They got real real close to executing Ellie in the first game because she's infected. They're never portrayed as good people either.
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
What scientists did he kill? He killed the doctor, from what I remember he had no choice in that a) because he pulls a scalpel, and b) because he literally has no choice to progress the game otherwise. The other two were optional. Mostly what he kills are soldiers trying to kill him. There was never any guarantee that the doctor could create a viable vaccine from Ellie, and even if he did, how would they produce it in amounts necessary to save the world?
I'm going to wager
the goal would never have been to "save the world", so much as become the world. "Join the Fireflies and get immunity!" would be a hell of a sales pitch to get people under their umbrella.
+4
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited June 2020
We actually have developed vaccines against fungal infections (they are in phase 1 clinical trials). It wasn't so much a lack of ability or technology, it was more that nobody really had the interest in doing it to actually investigate. If we had a problem like this, you can bet a bunch of people would have been interested in trying to develop a vaccine and probably could have succeeded. Unless they were all eating one another of course.
People, get over yourselves. If you ever have to deal with a dog that was trained to kill then you would have zero hesitation with killing every attack dog you encounter in the game. They’re essentially deadly weapons that can think and hunt you down.
I don't think that's really the spark of the issue. It's that the game literally forces you to kill one particular dog, in addition into the others you probably optional killed, but then tries to retroactively make you feel terrible by making you play with the same dog, and sort of background implying "all dogs were just like this one, they were all loved by their humans, you monster".
It's "stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself (in the emotions)" the video game.
I agree.
I felt bad for Alice, but like a lot of the violence in this game it's either justified self-defense or it kinda comes off a bit clumsy. It did make me feel sad when I was playing fetch with Alice with Abbey and Lev though, but more in the sense that one persons beloved pet/companion is another persons lethal danger. Had Alice been the first dog I murdered and I wasn't at the point I had been sadistically baiting dogs into mines or booby trapping bodies it might have been different. Contextualizing violence is one thing, but it only really works from a narrative point of view if that violence isn't particularly common in the story. The fact I'd been exploding, setting fire and outright shooting dogs for a while beforehand meant that while it sucked, it didn't quite have the emotional weight I feel Naughty Dog thought it would. You can't make me feel that bad about an individual death that I don't have a major investment in, especially when I've been bathing the entire game in a sea of dog and human parts.
Carrying on this thought to the ending however:
This is why I feel the actual fights with Abbey and Ellie worked so well. I was invested and interested in both characters fates, so their absolutely fucking brutal fights. I gave a shit about both characters and didn't want either of them to die - even though I really did think Abbey had to die because Naughty Dog wouldn't have the cajones to let Joel's death go un-avenged for many players. They surprised me there!
As for above about a certain character moving to the "front lines"
If you spend some time stuffing around listening to the soldiers and Manuel, it's set up so that Abbey is forced to spend time talking to Mel. Nobody thinks this is any threat and Mel is supposed to be dropped off somewhere before they go to the front line. So it's not some huge narrative plot hole, it's just the scars are much more aggressively attacking than they anticipated and shit goes sideways. Nobody thinks that they are this far forward and realizes just how effectively the scars have built structures to get around them entirely (as we see later in the game). That's the post-apocalypse for you!
Look, we've all slipped on a banana peel, cartwheeled across a room and accidentally impregnated a friend.
I feel like you're giving Owen a lot of slack, here. Abby has profound issues, Owen doesn't want to hurt anyone, but he's a douche.
His plan to abandon Pregnant Mel and run away to Santa Barbara did not endear him to me lol
@Chance, I too, had this exact experience. I was all on board with him until that point.
To me, after fucking Abbey and trying to encourage her to leave with him while leaving Mel behind was plain scummy. You made your choices mate. Stick with them.
Hurry up and finish the game too Chance. I want to see what you think of the end.
Edit: Also a weird narrative point that reading some analyses and criticisms of the story I've seen struck me today, especially now I finished it
At absolutely no point in the entire game does Abby tell Ellie, or hell, Ellie even ask, why Joel was killed. Ellie obviously figures it's a firefly thing, but she is never told that Abby killed Joel because the surgeon was her father. It just never actually comes up at all between the two women and that feels like a really strange thing to keep to themselves. Minding, I guess Abby doesn't particularly care why Ellie is chasing after her either, but it would have made Ellies action at the end perhaps come across more strongly than it does
i will also ask what you were expecting of the trajectory of the game if you're feeling like you're
'forced' to empathise with abby
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
It was obvious they are Firefly holdovers so I already know her motives and why. Her motives are she thinks Joel destroyed the hope of the human race, that the surgeon was her dad is whatever.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
it's based on the death of her father
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
Antifa doesn’t torture then execute people and commit acts terrorism through bombings. And wouldn’t be prepared to kill an innocent girl against her will, like Abbys dad was.
Oh yeah I definitely forgot about the casual 'boy I sure would like to torture that guy!' dialogue when they make it to the front line
I don’t know if you’re being facetious or not but multiple times in this game and the first game cover the Fireflies being terrorists.
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
Okay but
one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The fireflies sucked but the fedra did too. They got real real close to executing Ellie in the first game because she's infected. They're never portrayed as good people either.
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
What part of maiming innocent people who are not Fedra makes you a freedom fighter?
Of course Fedra was going to kill Ellie she registers as infected. It was a quarantine zone, they don’t have any other choice. It would be more cruel to banish her and let her succumb to a horrible fungus monster fate.
Yes, Joel is the good guy at the end of the first game as far as saving Ellie goes. They were going to butcher her for nothing. If she had arrived there awake and didn’t want to go through with it, they were going to sedate her by force and kill her anyway.
Hell they wanted to just kill Joel regardless as well. Before they had any idea he’d care enough to stop them they just wanted to kill the man who braved a post apocalypse nightmare world, keeping Ellie safe just to get her to them. The man who delivered them their grand prize specimen for their miracle cure. His reward was going to be death.
Abbys dad only died because he pulled a scalpel on Joel, who was not holding a weapon, and said he’d never take her. Joel just wanted Ellie, if that guy hadnt pulled that scalpel and threatened Joel he’d have just pushed by him grabbed Ellie and ran.
Sure “the player” can killl or spare the other doctors if they want but in the cutscene that mandates what for sure happens in the narrative Joel doesn’t attack the unarmed doctors.
Viskod on
+1
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I am eyeing all these TLOU2 reviews like "Uh..... what?" This story and these characters are botched up on so many levels. It looks amazing, it plays great, the voice acting is superb, but this plot.... yeeeesh. This is bad.
How so? I feel like the plot was pretty straight forward.
This spoiler refers to TLOU2
A lot of my issues come from how they completely mishandled Abby in my opinion. I'm fine with Abby killing Joel, but if you want to kill Joel and you want it to be done by a new character that you would also like your audience to empathize with one some level, then they went about it just about the worst way they could. Trading actual investment into both Abby and Joel in that moment for pure sudden shock value of it happening so fast and so soon.
First of all this group marches through all of Washington, Idaho, and into Wyoming in a post apocalyptic world, in winter, just to kill one guy.
Did you know that the original game was supposed to have Tess follow after Joel and Ellie after a supposed betrayal and Tess was hunting them down for revenge? But the team sidelined that plot because they thought it was to ridiculous and dumb for someone to waste so much time and energy on a petty revenge quest against one person in this kind of world.
So Joel saves Abby's life, and she tortures him anyway. A girl busts in and they beat her, pin her to the ground making her face him so she can watch Abby deliver the final blow and bash Joel's head in. And then.... for "reasons" they inexplicably leave Tommy and Ellie alive. The only two people that even knew they were there, and they left them alive. They knew that Joel lived in a large, heavily populated, heavily armed, fully functioning has goddamn electricity city that is just right down the hill, and they let the only two witnesses live after traveling all that way just to brutally murder someone.
You can obviously assume they are firefly leftovers, so their motives are clear. So I don't care about Abby's backstory at this point, her cartoonishly evil introduction has wasted that opportunity.
What's more is her laughable gall to say "I let you live and you squandered it!" when she confronts them at the theater. Like, yes. You let Joel's brother and this girl live, after brutally murdering someone in front of her. WHAT DID YOU THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
Did none of these people who were wearing uniforms with the name of where they come from on them even stop and think that it's going to be obvious who would come from out of nowhere and single out Joel specifically to kill? Did they really think his own brother wouldn't know? That Ellie wouldn't know? That no one would come after them?
The entire setup is just all so ridiculous. And such a waste.
So I think the answer is kind of in the initial part you quoted, where they didn't have that plot in the first game because who on earth is mad enough to chase someone over an entire country to kill someone over one person? They probably didn't realize that Ellie and Tommy could follow them back home so far, especially because there was an infected horde in the area and they likely didn't consider that they could do it. Likewise, there are a lot of WLF in the area and I suspect they figured that would be something that would keep them safe/make them impossible to get to. I don't feel like she's cartoonishly evil though, because I watched Joel do just as terrible things in the first game - not to mention the shit we know he did we didn't see (such as his implied time as a hunter). While it's initially shocking as well, I felt it worked in the context of the narrative - however all over the place a lot of it was. I do feel they possibly should have started the game with certain flashbacks, but their structure was clearly to go through one character and then the others perspectives one after the other.
Did that inherently work? I'm not sure, but I did think killing him so early was Hitchcock levels of bold and I feel it was an important part of stamping their control over this narrative. It was the first of the consequences of what he did in the first game coming home to roost.
I think they would have been much better off putting Joel's death into a different scenario. One a little further into the game so that we can have more time with Abby. Tease out a little bit of her back story here and there. Make her meeting with Joel and his group a by chance occurrence.
Because the best outcome for the audience I believe, is if you engineer it so that your players realize that Abby's father was the surgeon Joel killed at the same moment that Abby realizes who Joel is. Have Abby and Joel alone together in that moment and let her murder of him be an on the spot in the heat of the moment kind of thing, where she gives into anger and revenge.
It would also make Ellie's revenge killings more impactful if the people in Abby's group she kills weren't actually complicit in Joel's death the way they are in the beginning of this game.
I do agree entirely here. If it had just been Abby doing it and not had everyone else involved, it would have made Ellies brutal murder of the likes of Nora feel a lot more horrible than it does. Ellie does a lot of terrible shit, but showing how far she was willing to go and become just like Joel, until arguably the end, would have worked a lot better.
Seattle Day 3 (Part II) is in the can, Ellie has abandoned her domestic bliss and when we caught up with Abby and Lev in Cali, I shut it down for the night.
For now... gotta' go do my fucking job...
'Chance, you are the best kind of whore.' -Henroid
Posts
Even the part with her playing fetch with a dog that's definitely supposed to twist the knife about you killing them as Ellie just a little bit ago, all I could think was 'you're actively breeding these dogs to kill and be wielded as weapons'
Not to mention their apparent apathy at Mel, who is extremely pregnant being sent to the 'front lines' which is apparently dangerous enough to get them special treatment in line for food
THANK YOU.
I just really, really can't fathom how Druckman thought trying to force empathy for Abby in this way was a good idea. I've heard the argument that if the story were un-Tarantino'd and fed to us in chronological order, we would've gotten more time with her before killing Joel, thus gotten to understand her headspace a little more. Conversely, the little time we got with Joel and Ellie together would've felt longer and more substantial. To this end, I'm downloading all the game cutscenes and going to try a re-edit myself to see how much this theory holds up.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
Really, REALLY taxed my suspension of disbelief.
Smacks of lazy, contrived writing. It needed to happen because the plot needed to move forward.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
ehh
i am going to check myself here because i'm not finished yet and endings are always where the most important messages are sent. we'll see how we go.
Lots of people are willing to die, but stop short of seeing the ones they love meet the same fate, even if they express their consent.
it's telegraphed in the opening! it was always a story told partly from her perspective. that opening makes us wonder about her perspective through ellie's segments anyway, even if they didn't go on to make it narrative matter.
if you hold onto loyalties from the previous game i can see where you might struggle, but if you see it as its own self-contained narrative, exploring a complex issue of perpetual vengeance and violence from two perspectives, i don't see how you can truck with ellie and not abby. they're two halves of this, and - in my opinion - equally endearing to the audience, in different ways. abby maybe even moreso, because i think she inherently subverts a lot of what Gamers Want, and so her representation feels fresh and interesting
Not for me.
I don’t care. Her point of view is based on wackadoo cult mentality from a terrorist organization that was no better than Joel in their methods regardless of their intentions.
no it's not
exactly the same as ellie (it's no stretch to read joel as her father-figure)
the fireflies were NEVER in my recollection presented as a crazy cult. they were essentially antifa rebels who saw science as the best hope.
We were onboard when Ellie wanted revenge for the murder of her father.
I'm on board with Abby wanting the same thing. They're pretty morally-equal, it's just that Ellie is fucking rude.
The fact that Abby is with the WLF doesn't make her a shitty person any more than Joel being with Tess made him a shitty person (though it sure helped!). Ellie and Abby both just kinda' slid in with the folks they were with in order to survive, and didn't really choose shit.
Ellie: Whew.
Dog Handler #57: Lassiiiieee!
But it’s tough not to compare Ellie’s intro and community with Abby’s. Jackson is a community, and Abby’s home is run like a military installation, with Abby being a willing and eager soldier in it.
Joel is a horrible person who did not deserve a happy ending, but his first instinct when coming across a stranger was still to save their life. When Jessie makes it to Seattle, the way he tells it, they shot first, and asked questions never. And then there’s the dogs. And all this isn't to protect from Infected either, but primarily to kill other non-infected humans.
Ellie and Abby may be on the same quest, but Abby definitely has more in common with Joel than she does with Ellie.
absolutely, but consider
when joel and ellie are exploring the dinosaur museum and you pause by the dimetrodon, we see where ellie's going. i can't remember the exact dialogue, but the message is there: she may be a little short, but by the time this is done she will be the apex predator
(Google "Michael Vick.)
...
I'mma' go ahead and trust you on that.
I don’t think any of the setting portrayals were meant to show a perfect society... they are all flawed, but in their own way, from the Boston QZ to Jackson to the factions in Seattle. There are a lot of wrong answers, but also a lot of good ones... and that’s what a society is. I think they did a good job of portraying multi-faceted post-apoc cultures right up until the very end section (which is a comic book, at best).
Often in this game the plotting feels kinda' weak - stuff often feels pret-ty convenient for shuttling our plot forward - but the moment to moment dialogue is pretty okay. Performances? *chefkiss* muah.
Right, but if a writer wants you to empathize with a character you normally wouldn't, they need to do their homework and put in the requisite effort to make it happen. Don't read this spoiler until you've beaten it.
Then, at long last, you have Abby kill Joel, and the scene hits so much harder now that we've seen the prior scene between him and Ellie, rather than at the very end where it just makes you wish Ellie hadn't spared her because it's fucking devastating. If you reordered everything like this, I feel like it'd be a lot easier to feel conflicted about what Abby did and not outright hate her for it.
But y'see, that's the problem.
Like, a character you should feel anything resembling empathy for might've seen Ellie crying and screaming and begging her to stop on the ground and at least...fucking hesitated for two seconds? Maybe flash her an apologetic look to communicate, "I'm sorry, this wasn't about you." Or at very least, not force her to fucking WATCH her father (figure) be murdered in cold blood? Not even Joel killed Abby's dad right in front of her.
Fair point. Since I can't remember anything that outright refutes it, I'll give you that one.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
edit: stupid having a job and kids when you just want to play explicitly violent videogames all day
There is a part in this game where you find messages left behind by an ex firefly who couldn’t live with the things they had him do and killed himself.
One instance being burning a family alive in their own van.
It's "stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself (in the emotions)" the video game.
Okay but
No one in this game was a good guy. Except maybe Jessie, he seemed cool.
But if you came away from the first game thinking Joel is a good guy, I'm pretty surprised. He killed scientists who were unarmed! He lied to ellie after committing what was essentially a crime against humanity. They definitely should have woken ellie up and asked her instead of waking Joel up, but they were trying real hard to save humanity.
Now these are of course video games dogs so they're not real, but in essence the same principle applies.
Moreso even than that, how the hell would they have distributed such a vaccine? Population centers were massively sporadic and scattered. Also, half the people still living and uninfected are crazy cannibals, cultists, or survivalist nutjobs. Do they all get the vaccine too? Do they just get to reintegrate into society with no fuss? And if so, how do you go about finding all these widely separated people to innoculate them?
There was no way logistically a vaccine would've ever been viable. Not to mention if you wanted to synthesize a vaccine for a fungal infection (which is something that isn't done and we really don't have the technology to do), killing Ellie is the LAST thing you would ever want to do. Although I chalk that up to Druckman not researching the science of what he was presenting as thoroughly as he should've.
"For a few seconds Oskar saw through Eli's eyes. And what he saw was...himself. Only much better, more handsome, stronger than what he thought of himself. Seen with love."
--John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Page 446).
I'm going to wager
I agree.
Carrying on this thought to the ending however:
As for above about a certain character moving to the "front lines"
Finally about Owen:
@Chance, I too, had this exact experience. I was all on board with him until that point.
Hurry up and finish the game too Chance. I want to see what you think of the end.
Edit: Also a weird narrative point that reading some analyses and criticisms of the story I've seen struck me today, especially now I finished it
Of course Fedra was going to kill Ellie she registers as infected. It was a quarantine zone, they don’t have any other choice. It would be more cruel to banish her and let her succumb to a horrible fungus monster fate.
Yes, Joel is the good guy at the end of the first game as far as saving Ellie goes. They were going to butcher her for nothing. If she had arrived there awake and didn’t want to go through with it, they were going to sedate her by force and kill her anyway.
Hell they wanted to just kill Joel regardless as well. Before they had any idea he’d care enough to stop them they just wanted to kill the man who braved a post apocalypse nightmare world, keeping Ellie safe just to get her to them. The man who delivered them their grand prize specimen for their miracle cure. His reward was going to be death.
Abbys dad only died because he pulled a scalpel on Joel, who was not holding a weapon, and said he’d never take her. Joel just wanted Ellie, if that guy hadnt pulled that scalpel and threatened Joel he’d have just pushed by him grabbed Ellie and ran.
Sure “the player” can killl or spare the other doctors if they want but in the cutscene that mandates what for sure happens in the narrative Joel doesn’t attack the unarmed doctors.
Did that inherently work? I'm not sure, but I did think killing him so early was Hitchcock levels of bold and I feel it was an important part of stamping their control over this narrative. It was the first of the consequences of what he did in the first game coming home to roost.
For now... gotta' go do my fucking job...