Last of Us 2 discussion

[Manbearcat]

I have many problems with this game, but I'll start and end with these two things:

1) It made me feel exactly like watching Alien 3 again. Ripley (my favorite character of all time) had absolutely everything taken from her...and the story that spun out of it could not have been less emotionally or theatrically compelling.

2) If you're making The Last of Us 2, your very first creative meeting must be utterly centered around 1 question and 1 question only:

"How do we make a sequel that doesn't answer the deeply provocative question that the original game saddles you with (in a world that lays bare the absolutely abomination that humanity will devolve to in such an apocalypse, is it reasonable to sacrifice a beautiful, utterly worthwhile creature in order to have a shot at salvaging the monstrous vestige of humanity...or...did Joel make the right decision)?"

If you answer that question, you've erred terribly.

If you answer that question emphatically with such decisiveness so as to leave no possible interpretation...you've essentially burned your creative legacy on a pyre of your own staggering misjudgement or comprehension of what emotionally compelled/provoked TLoU to its ascendent status.

Simply put, if you cannot make a sequel that fundamentally stays away from answering that question...don't make a sequel.

 

[Flamestrike]

I have many problems with this game, but I'll start and end with these two things:

1) It made me feel exactly like watching Alien 3 again. Ripley (my favorite character of all time) had absolutely everything taken from her...and the story that spun out of it could not have been less emotionally or theatrically compelling.

2) If you're making The Last of Us 2, your very first creative meeting must be utterly centered around 1 question and 1 question only:

"How do we make a sequel that doesn't answer the deeply provocative question that the original game saddles you with (in a world that lays bare the absolutely abomination that humanity will devolve to in such an apocalypse, is it reasonable to sacrifice a beautiful, utterly worthwhile creature in order to have a shot at salvaging the monstrous vestige of humanity...or...did Joel make the right decision)?"

If you answer that question, you've erred terribly.

If you answer that question emphatically with such decisiveness so as to leave no possible interpretation...you've essentially burned your creative legacy on a pyre of your own staggering misjudgement or comprehension of what emotionally compelled/provoked TLoU to its ascendent status.

Simply put, if you cannot make a sequel that fundamentally stays away from answering that question...don't make a sequel.

They didnt answer that question though.

They just examined the consequences of the decision made; on both Joel, Ellie and on other people.

 

[Manbearcat]

Your takeaway from the playing of and the results of that game was that it was “an examination” of Joel’s decision and the fallout (on everyone involved) and not “as thorough a condemnation as one could conceive?”

Wow.

That begs the question:

What exactly then, would a condemnation look like in your eyes?

EDIT - I'm baffled here. This isn't an emergent story that happened by accident. This is complete authorial intent and trajectory and fallout. You cited the thematic centerpiece in your lead-post; "Violence begets violence." Ghandi did this long before Naughty Dog.

You literally cannot make "Violence begets violence (ad infinitum)" the centerpiece of TLoU2, have all of the heavy-handed empathy moves made in that game, and all of the extreme fallout of that game without fundamentally answering the question at the heart of TLoU.

I truly have no idea how a person would start (from first principles) to begin to contest otherwise.

 

[Flamestrike]

Your takeaway from the playing of and the results of that game was that it was “an examination” of Joel’s decision and the fallout (on everyone involved) and not “as thorough a condemnation as one could conceive?”

Wow.

That begs the question:

What exactly then, would a condemnation look like in your eyes?

Was the decision condemned though? Ellie struggled with it before telling him she wants to forgive him for it, Joel stated that he would do the exact same thing again if he was faced with the same choice, his brother seemed to agree with it as well. Even flashbacks to Marleene showed her putting the Q to Abbys father 'What if where your own daughter?'

You cant murder a bunch of people, and doom humanity to the Zombie apocalypse without there being some kind of fallout or ramifications from that action.

 

[Manbearcat]

Was the decision condemned though? Ellie struggled with it before telling him she wants to forgive him for it, Joel stated that he would do the exact same thing again if he was faced with the same choice, his brother seemed to agree with it as well. Even flashbacks to Marleene showed her putting the Q to Abbys father 'What if where your own daughter?'

You cant murder a bunch of people, and doom humanity to the Zombie apocalypse without there being some kind of fallout or ramifications from that action.

I think you should start with your last sentence above.

Contrast the difference between "some kind of fallout" and the sort of complete and irrevocable fallout that TLoU2 wrought on (a) the protagonists of the 1st game, (b) the things/people/newfound ideas they love and hold dear in a brutal world that resists love/connection/healing/redemption/purpose, and (c) our conception of the themes of redemption, love, purpose and healing (set against a backdrop of abject horror and inhumanity) that the initial game was deeply invested in.

Playing TLoU felt a lot like some kind of combination of reading Cormac McCarthy's "The Road" and watching Aliens. This game felt like (because it was) the franchise's intentional (and intentionally provocative) unraveling of its thematic connection to those two works (and therefore its connection to its original work).

I remain curious what a full condemnation might look like as a metaplot and thematic ballast for TLoU2 (if this wasn't it).

 

[Flamestrike]

I think you should start with your last sentence above.

Contrast the difference between "some kind of fallout" and the sort of complete and irrevocable fallout that TLoU2 wrought on (a) the protagonists of the 1st game, (b) the things/people/newfound ideas they love and hold dear in a brutal world that resists love/connection/healing/redemption/purpose, and (c) our conception of the themes of redemption, love, purpose and healing (set against a backdrop of abject horror and inhumanity) that the initial game was deeply invested in.

Playing TLoU felt a lot like some kind of combination of reading Cormac McCarthy's "The Road" and watching Aliens. This game felt like (because it was) the franchise's intentional (and intentionally provocative) unraveling of its thematic connection to those two works (and therefore its connection to its original work).

There was no redemption in the first game though. Joel didnt redeem anyone or anything; he made a selfish decision (born out of love) to save his surrogate daughter from death... by engaging in mass murder, and dooming the entire world to the Zombie apocalypse.

Joel didn't finish part 1 redeemed. He finished part 1 as a mass murderer who denied humanity a cure to the zombie apocalypse dooming everyone.

 

[RangerWickett]

What exactly then, would a condemnation look like in your eyes?

Well, Abby is Joel, basically. So we're presented with another character who does something very similar to what Joel did - commit murder for the sake of someone they loved.

We (probably) see Abby as the villain.

Do we also see Joel as a villain? If not, why not?

It's not saying, "Joel is a villain for what he did in the first game."

It's saying, "If you are okay with what Joel did in the first game, why aren't you okay with what Abby does in the second game to Joel? How do you feel about being presented the other side of the situation?"

And as Flamestrike says, Elly tries to forgive Joel, and at the end she tries to forgive Abby.

So I don't see TLOU2 condemning Joel, not at all.

---

What would a full condemnation look like? It would look like Ellie finding out Joel did what he did, and then her rounding up a posse including Tommy, and all of them hunting down and eventually killing Joel, and then going to the Fireflies, where Ellie hands herself over to be experimented on for the sake of saving humanity. It would pretend that Ellie could act completely selflessly, and that everyone would recognize Joel as a villain.

That's not what we got.

Instead, we got something that's left me stewing in the implications for days. It's about not simply condemning violence, but about trauma, and recognizing ourselves in others, and about how love and empathy is how we make sense of the world, not violence and power.

 

[Manbearcat]

There was no redemption in the first game though. Joel didnt redeem anyone or anything; he made a selfish decision (born out of love) to save his surrogate daughter from death... by engaging in mass murder, and dooming the entire world to the Zombie apocalypse.

Joel didn't finish part 1 redeemed. He finished part 1 as a mass murderer who denied humanity a cure to the zombie apocalypse dooming everyone.

Ok, so this makes more sense.

If this is the lens through which you viewed the first game, then what you have posted makes complete sense. You don't feel like there was a question hanging in the balance for the playerbase of TLoU (meaning you come down so squarely on one side that it is an impossibility for you to fathom or empathize with the alternative). And you feel like a the sort of condemnation of Joel's decision TLoU2, replete with all of the fallout it could possible have wrought (primarily the physical and emotional destruction of Ellie in total and certainly all that she gained from the experience of the 1st game)...was, well, warranted.

Ok, through that lens, I understand your position. I couldn't possibly disagree with it more sternly and I wonder how you felt the initial game was remotely thematically compelling (if you indeed did?). But I understand.

What I don't understand is why you seem to be standing firm on "this game (with "violence begets violence ad infinitum" as its guiding ethos) isn't a complete condemnation of Joel's decision.

 

[RangerWickett]

by engaging in mass murder

Technically if you make an effort, you can stealth past everyone and only kill one doctor.

I wasn't that patient either, though.

 

[Flamestrike]

Its weird that so many people see Joel as a good guy.

His DnD alignment is unequivocally evil. He loves Ellie no doubt, but he's routinely depicted engaging in truly abhorrent acts of torture and murder.

We also get (in this game) to see Ellie walk down that same path of evil as well, where she engages in brutal torture, mass murder and worse.